Zenith-Archive.digest.vol-ca
December 30, 2000 - January 22, 2001
>> want to bore a lot of other people with the details
>>
>> I would probably use a 912 or 912S since light weight would be very
>> important. Anybody with a 912S want to comment on the advantages of that
>> choice. Can it use the same premium auto gas? Is the higher compression a
>> big factor in shorter life or dependability?
>>
>> Do people find that you can actually use this as a "real plane" or is it
>> relegated to more of a fair weather ultralight type usage?
>>
>> Has anybody made any long cross countries in a CH701 that they would like
to
>> share. It would be slow, but seems like great fun as you could see
>> everything and land in numerous great places.
>>
>> Will the 912 provide enough power to fly well off of amphibious floats?
How
>> does the 701 fly with amphibs when it is in the air? Seems like a lot of
>> drag on an already draggy airframe. Does it sink like a rock?
>>
>> Anybody using just the wing tanks with no header? I don't like the idea
of a
>> lap full of fuel.
>>
>> If it is built to plan with the 912, does it perform OK with two normal
>> people on board and some baggage?
>>
>> Has anybody made a baggage pod that is mounted underneath the fuselage?
>>
>> Is it comfortable for someone that is around 6'2" tall? Any special mods
>> that you made?
>>
>> I will look forward to people opinions on these questions or anything
else
>> they would like to offer to a person contemplating starting a 701.
>>
>> Walt Cannon
>> Seattle Wa
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> |
It's a long weekend, ZAC is closed, I'm working along on the
center wing section of my 601HD, and am confused by a statement
in the manual.
On page 20, it says - quote - The most outboard rib flange is positioned
between the doubler and the "Zee." - unquote.
My question is - WHAT doubler? The only thing I see is the inboard
splice plate, and the rib flange won't go under that because the flange
is pointing outboard. I can't find any other mention of a doubler, even
in the addendum.
Thanks for any help. Happy New Year to everybody!
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | Oops - 601HD rear zee |
I just answered my own question, so please ignore my last
plea for help on the 601HD rear zee. It IS the splice plate
that the flange of the outermost rib flange is under.
Sorry for wasted bandwidth and time.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Maxson <pmaxson(at)interactive.net> |
My fuel tanks don't have any grounding tabs, so I ran a wire from the
sender hardware (one of the mounting screws that is in contact with the
tank) to the wing. This was a suggestion from Nick.
What did you end up doing with the top of the fuel sender? I cut an
access hole and closed (clecoed) the leading edge. Mine sticks up about
5 mm. I'm fooling around with making a cover with a bump in the center
that sticks up enough to miss the top of the sender.
What do you plan to use to insulate the sender top from the skin?
Phil Maxson
601XL
Fabricating the wing tip.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wizard-24(at)juno.com |
> My fuel tanks don't have any grounding tabs, so I ran a wire from
> the sender hardware (one of the mounting screws that is in contact with
> the tank) to the wing. This was a suggestion from Nick.
After ordering the aux fuel tank kit, ZAC sent me a new set of main tanks
also (different filler neck/cap, has a grounding tab welded to the front
edge, and other mods to accomodate the outboard tanks). I guess I'll run
a grounding wire (any guage?) from the tab to one of the nose ribs?
> What did you end up doing with the top of the fuel sender? I cut an
> access hole and closed (clecoed) the leading edge. Mine sticks up
> about 5 mm. I'm fooling around with making a cover with a bump in the
> center that sticks up enough to miss the top of the sender.
Now that I have the new tanks and can start over, I'll be moving the
sender unit closer to the leading edge, which should give me enough room
to clear the nose skin without any penetrations (I hope). I'll also need
to shorten the threaded portion of the top of the sender for the
necessary clearance. And I figure I'll glue some sort of thin rubber to
the bottom of the nose skin over the sender to avoid any contact. I don't
know if there will be room for all of this, but if it doesn't work out,
I'll probably do the same thing as you (cover with a bump in it).
I had planned to try it out tomorrow, but I still haven't received my
order of Sealube yet from Aircraft Spruce, so I can't install the tank
fittings. Is that what you used?
In the meantime, I'll probably run the wiring for the wing tip/strobe
lights, and maybe even tackle the wing tip itself if it's OK to close the
rear portion of the wing without having completed the tank installation.
Mike Fortunato
601XL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Ingraham" <iflyul(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bending Brake |
Hey Chuck.....Thanks from all of us fools who let that copy of Experimenter
slip out of our hands.......Please post the article and picks.......Happy
New Year to all.......
Eric
>From: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)tstar.net>
>Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Bending Brake
>Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 22:37:12 -0600
>
>
>I have been sending out the Brake article, individually one at a time as it
>is a JPEG. If everybody who wants it, will say they want it, I will send it
>out at one time to all.
>Grant, I'll wait a day or two for the responses and then send it to you.
>Chuck D.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net>
>To:
>Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2000 9:30 PM
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Bending Brake
>
>
> >
> > on 12/28/00 11:25 AM, Glen Chapple at sims(at)recorder.ca wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> BRIAN HOPE wrote:
> > >
>
> > >
> > > An 8ft bender that was featured in November's " Experimenter" was
>mentioned
> > > a couple of weeks ago. Though an EAA member I only receive "Sport
>Aviation".
> > > I would appreciate an e-mailed copy of the article if anybody has one.
> > > any thanks, Brian Hope. Scratch building a 601 UL.
> > >>
> > > I too would be interested in a copy if available
> > > TIA
> > >
> > > Glen
> >
> > me too.... please!
> >
> > --
> > Grant Corriveau
> > Montreal
> > Zodiac 601hds/CAM100
> > C-GHTF
> >
> >
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com> |
Mike,
The reason for the "isolation" is load distribution, avoid
vibration/wear, thermal expansion of the tank
when fuel is put into it. This way, just the load of the fuel/tank is
transferred
evenly to supporting ribs and skins & it's simpler to do for the builder, &
it needs to be grounded.
Larry C. McFarland
----- Original Message -----
From: <wizard-24(at)juno.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 5:22 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
> > "1. The plans indicate gluing strips of cork on all surfaces of the
tank
> to keep the tank itself from touching the metal parts of the wing. But,
> the tanks also have a grounding tab, with instructions to attach a wire
> to the airframe. So my question is whether or not the purpose of the cork
> is simply to provide a cushion, rather than as an insulator?" >
> > I'd really like to close this darn wing, but need to be sure that I have
> answers to the above first. Thanks in advance for the help!
>
> Mike Fortunato
> 601XL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Lest we forget... :) |
| From: | Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net> |
An interesting review of some basics:
http://www.howstuffworks.com/airplane.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 601HD rear zee |
Bill,
I wondered the same thing, but what is being said is this. The rear
vertical rib flange is supposed
to be placed between the end of the rear doubler plate and the rear zspar.
Illustrated on sheet 6-V-7
The outboard rear z extension, part 6-V-7-6, (See View from Top). Plans
show 4 A5s here and
3 at all other rib connections.
Good luck,
Larry C. McFarland
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Steer <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 8:00 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 601HD rear zee
>
> It's a long weekend, ZAC is closed, I'm working along on the
> center wing section of my 601HD, and am confused by a statement
> in the manual.
>
> On page 20, it says - quote - The most outboard rib flange is positioned
> between the doubler and the "Zee." - unquote.
>
> My question is - WHAT doubler? The only thing I see is the inboard
> splice plate, and the rib flange won't go under that because the flange
> is pointing outboard. I can't find any other mention of a doubler, even
> in the addendum.
>
> Thanks for any help. Happy New Year to everybody!
>
> Bill
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
I made openings so I could service the senders if ever needed then with a
ball pean hammer made blisters out of aluminum about 1/2 inch high and
riveted them over the sender.
Once the wing is painted they will hardly be visible.
Richard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com> |
| Subject: | Dave Austin's Zodiac wing root fairings |
At 03:16 PM 26-08-2000 , you wrote:
>
>Any web-photos of your plane / fairings?
>
>Darryl
>
>
> >
> > 601HDS C-FQLN
> > 609 lbs 850 ft/min been to 10,000 55 mph ias stall
> > 80 mph ias approach 912UL 121 mph ias cruise
> > 128 mph ias max Using Arplast 3 blade flight-adjustable prop which gave
> > extra 4 mph ias.
> > I have self-built wheel fairings, fairings round the u/c mounting boxes
>for
> > the mains, (trike) and wing-root fairings like a Spitfire which improved
> > climb.
> > Dave Austin 601HDS 445 hrs
Hi Darryl,
I was doing a review of my stored Zenith list email, and came across the
above. If you haven't already seen pics of Dave's fairings, I've got just a
single photo on my web site, that went online only recently.
It's near the bottom of the page at
web.ionsys.com/~pchapman/pmc_zdc_photos_construction.htm
Peter Chapman
Toronto, ON
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)tstar.net> |
My 701 fuel tank senders are in recessed holes in top of tank, I just put
access covers over them to work on them if needed. See photos on my web
page under Wing Tanks. By the way I only have wing tanks no header tank.
http://pages.tstar.net/~cfd/
Chuck D.
----- Original Message -----
From: <wizard-24(at)juno.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 5:22 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
> I'm installing the 601XL leading edge wing fuel tanks (total of 4 tanks -
> 2 per wing), and as usual, a couple of questions came up that keeps me
> from going any farther.....and it's a weekend, so ZAC is closed. So, with
> the hopes of getting quicker answers so I can resume building, I thought
> I'd ask the list:
>
> 1. The plans indicate gluing strips of cork on all surfaces of the tank
> to keep the tank itself from touching the metal parts of the wing. But,
> the tanks also have a grounding tab, with instructions to attach a wire
> to the airframe. So my question is whether or not the purpose of the cork
> is simply to provide a cushion, rather than as an insulator? It seems
> silly to spend a lot of time making sure that no portion of the tank
> comes in contact with anything, only to attach a grounding strap to the
> airframe.
>
> 2. Despite having 4 tanks, I only received 2 fuel sensors. Since the
> outboard tanks run to a "Y" connector, and so do the inboard tanks,
> should I just mount one sensor in ONE of the inboard tanks, and in ONE of
> the outboard tanks? I'm thinking that since the fuel lines are Y'd
> together, the fuel level should stay balanced in each set of tanks,
> thereby requiring only one sensor per set.
>
> I'd really like to close this darn wing, but need to be sure that I have
> answers to the above first. Thanks in advance for the help!
>
> Mike Fortunato
> 601XL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Before beginning the wing kit for our 801 project, I am trying to compile all
lessons learned and updates from others. Do any of you fellow 801ers have
any words of wisdom about the wing kit other than the 10/24/00 updates shown
on the ZAC web site?
Thx,
Dave Zilz
St. Peters MO
e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Maxson <pmaxson(at)interactive.net> |
> I guess I'll run
> a grounding wire (any guage?) from the tab to one of the nose ribs?
>
I used 16 gage. It may be overkill but the run from the tank to the rib
is very short.
> I had planned to try it out tomorrow, but I still haven't received my
> order of Sealube yet from Aircraft Spruce, so I can't install the tank
> fittings. Is that what you used?
I used sealer from the local plumbing supply. It says it is to be used
for "gasoline, jet fuel" and various and sundry other solvents. It only
gets applied to the male fitting and doesn't harden.
It sounds like you are not planning to install an access cover over the
sender. I got the idea to do so from some pictures of the prototype
(the first one). It will eliminate the need to open the leading edge if
there is a problem with the sender or wiring. I don't think it would be
possible to add later without opening the leading edge.
How close to the leading edge do you plan to move the sender? I'm not
convinced that moving it closer to the bend down the middle of the top
of the tank (5th bend?) will help anything. That bend (with cork over
it) touches the skin. It appears to me that moving closer to the spar
would do it. Please give me your opinion.
Thanks for your input (and the input of others). I couldn't imaging
building this plane without the help of listers.
Phil Maxson
601XL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Maxson <pmaxson(at)interactive.net> |
Chuck Deiterich wrote:
> My 701 fuel tank senders are in recessed holes in top of tank, I just put
> access covers over them to work on them if needed.
Nicely done. Did you put in the recessed holes or did Zenith? If you,
how?
Thanks in advance,
Phil Maxson
601XL
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| From: | Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net> |
Hey all,
To add to a recent description of how I bumbled my way throught the canopy
construction, I've added a few photos to my photo album (see the last 7
photos in the sequence). They don't really show much detail, but may be of
some help to anyone about to embark on this 'adventure'... I found it easier
than expected - just time consuming as I went through many 'iterations' - I
think that's the mathematical term for 'keep on trying it until it fits' ;-)
Happy New Year!
Grant
(Aircraft album)
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=962828&a=7061580
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Frisby" <marslander(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
A few items I recall, I've made some notes in my copy of the assembly
manuals if you need more specifics.
1) don't rivet the rear of rib #4 or the rear strut pickup until AFTER
fitting and riveting trailing edge of wing. It gets in the way of a few
rivets on the bottom of the rear spar. Cleco this rib from the inside and
leave the clecos in until time to close the wing's top skin.
2) don't rivet the slat pickups to the #1 main rib until after fitting the
inboard wingtip (inboard top skin). This will allow easier fitting of the
top skin as it wraps down below the slat pickup. Remove the pickup whil
fitting the skin, then cleco in place and trim for the slat pickup as
necessary, you may rivet in place after fitting the skin.
3) if your manual refers to 11 columns of 3 rivet holes each on the rear
spar root, it should be 10.
4) be sure to print out and refer to Nick's update pages from the website.
Jim Frisby
>From: Z4T143(at)aol.com
>Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned
>Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 16:38:07 EST
>
>
>Before beginning the wing kit for our 801 project, I am trying to compile
>all
>lessons learned and updates from others. Do any of you fellow 801ers have
>any words of wisdom about the wing kit other than the 10/24/00 updates
>shown
>on the ZAC web site?
>
>Thx,
>
>Dave Zilz
>St. Peters MO
>e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
>web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Frisby" <marslander(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Oh yes, and also delay riveting the inboard top skin to the wing until after
fitting the wing to the fuselage. The first step of the section on fitting
wing to fuse has you remove it.
Jim Frisby
>From: Z4T143(at)aol.com
>Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned
>Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 16:38:07 EST
>
>
>Before beginning the wing kit for our 801 project, I am trying to compile
>all
>lessons learned and updates from others. Do any of you fellow 801ers have
>any words of wisdom about the wing kit other than the 10/24/00 updates
>shown
>on the ZAC web site?
>
>Thx,
>
>Dave Zilz
>St. Peters MO
>e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
>web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au> |
| Subject: | 701 Questions from a prospective builder |
Steve,
My comments on this thread. I'm 6'4" and about 230 pounds and I found the
701 a little bit uncomfortable to fly in. But that was mainly due to the
placment of the instrument panel and the rudderpedals. You can get an extra
100mm out of the rudder placement if you move the toe brakes piston
position. I've yet to figure out how I'm oging to do this but that is what
I'm going to do. Also I'm going to raise the instrument panel height by
about 50-75 mm. THat should make a hell of a lot of difference to the knee
height.
By the way, you have full length perspex doors. Did you keep any drawings on
your design? If not would you be able to take some detailed pictures of your
doors. I'm thinking of doing that on my machines.
Mike B
2 701's simultaneous build. 4.5 months, 430hrs, flying surfaces done on both
machines, rear fuses almost complete on both machines. Moving on to the
forward fuses.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Steve
Danielson
Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 11:27 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 701 Questions from a prospective builder
I can answer only this question:
> Is it comfortable for someone that is around 6'2" tall? Any special mods
> that you made?
I am 6'2" and weight 230 lbs. I fit in there just perfect. No mods. Feels
roomier than a C-152, and visibility is much better. My friend is about
6'3" - 6'4", he is really cramped, and it is too small for him to be
comfortable. But it is perfect for me.
Steve Danielson
http://home.nc.rr.com/danielson/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au> |
My two cents worth on this topic.
I've installed two sets of wing tanks in the 2 701's I'm building. Instead
of using cork I used 2 pack polyeurathane expanding foam that I bought from
a boating supply shop. You mix up the foam until it starts expanding and
pour it in around the position of the tank and wait till it has set.
It takes you about 10 minutes tops and sets in position so the tank just
won't move. I leave the surface underneath the top skins free from the foam
to allow the tank to expand with temperature.
I chose this material for a number of good reasons. Fistly cork rots. It
will get wet and it will decay over time. Sooner or later you will have to
replace it. Cork should absorb petrol and if you had a leak you could have a
problem with the cork expanding. IN a fire cork burns. Finally it seemed
like it would take a bit of time to fit 4 wings with fully lined cork tank
compartments and then installing the tank.
The polyeurathane was simple, quick, it is impervious to or chemicals feul,
it doesn't rot, it doesn't expand with water, it chars but does not burn in
a fire(I know because I tried it out on a sample) it bonds chemically with
the surface of the so there is NO movement of the tank. You can lift up the
wing just by the throat of the tank the bonding of the tank to the eurethane
is that good, and there is a lot less to do in installing the wind tanks. If
anyone wants a digital photo I'll send it to you.
regards,
Mike B.
2 701's simultaneaous. over the hump
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Larry
McFarland
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
Mike,
The reason for the "isolation" is load distribution, avoid
vibration/wear, thermal expansion of the tank
when fuel is put into it. This way, just the load of the fuel/tank is
transferred
evenly to supporting ribs and skins & it's simpler to do for the builder, &
it needs to be grounded.
Larry C. McFarland
----- Original Message -----
From: <wizard-24(at)juno.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 5:22 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
> > "1. The plans indicate gluing strips of cork on all surfaces of the
tank
> to keep the tank itself from touching the metal parts of the wing. But,
> the tanks also have a grounding tab, with instructions to attach a wire
> to the airframe. So my question is whether or not the purpose of the cork
> is simply to provide a cushion, rather than as an insulator?" >
> > I'd really like to close this darn wing, but need to be sure that I have
> answers to the above first. Thanks in advance for the help!
>
> Mike Fortunato
> 601XL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I'd like to see a photo of the foam method for fuel tank placement. Are
there any known draw-backs to this approach? Please e-mail me.
Thx
Dave Zilz
St. Peters MO
e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Tanner" <vk3auu(at)sympac.com.au> |
If you really want to find out how much power you are getting, measure the
fuel flow and calculate HP as 0.47 pounds per hour per horsepower to get
pretty close to the mark for a four stroke. You can be pretty confident that
you won't get any better than that.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Walker" <dwalker3dw(at)dellnet.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 1:40 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 601 w/912S?
>
> Reiner Hoffman told me that my Stratus puts out about 113 H.P. in spite of
> the Advertised 100 HP. He planned to change his brochures on next
printing,
> he said, but then sold his business. I haven't tested mine, but I know my
> HDS climbs better than people want to believe until they see it or take a
> ride. You might ask Mike Templeton, the new owner of Stratus, what he is
> getting out of the engines. Don Walker
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Flyink" <flyink(at)efortress.com>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2000 9:32 PM
> Subject: Zenith-List: 601 w/912S?
>
>
> >
> > Does anyone know of a 601 flying with a 912S? I'm looking for
> performance
> > comparison between a 912S and a Stratus EA-81. I'm guessing they are
very
> > close. Most people say that the extra weight of the soob will result in
> > less performance, but at gross weight the HP/weight is about the same
> > (assuming 105 HP verses 100 HP for Stratus). This would hold true for
> climb
> > and max speed but I don't know how they compare at cruise. The rotax
> likes
> > to cruise at 5000 rpm but the Stratus likes to cruise around 4600 - 4800
> > rpm. Depends on torque and HP curves I guess. Maybe the higher
> > displacement soob makes up for the higher drive-ratio rotax.
> > This isn't to choose an engine (so I'm not trying to fan the fire of
the
> > great engine debate ;<} ), it's to figure out the pitch of a fixed-pitch
> > wood prop for the Stratus when the cruise is known with a 912S (for
> another
> > airplane - long story). I figured if I could get both numbers for a 601
> > then the comparison should be close for almost any plane.
> > Thanks, Gary K.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au> |
If there is one drawback to this method it is that once you mix up the foam
it is going to set. You've got to watch the position of the tanks through
out the setting process. Also it produces some fumes.
regards,
Mike b
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Z4T143(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 7:47 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
I'd like to see a photo of the foam method for fuel tank placement. Are
there any known draw-backs to this approach? Please e-mail me.
Thx
Dave Zilz
St. Peters MO
e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
What happens if you have to disassemble to repair the tank or the wing?
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: <Z4T143(at)aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 11:47 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
> I'd like to see a photo of the foam method for fuel tank placement. Are
> there any known draw-backs to this approach? Please e-mail me.
>
> Thx
>
> Dave Zilz
> St. Peters MO
> e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
> web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)tstar.net> |
Phil,
Zenith cut the holes and welded the recessed flanges for me, I forget the
cost but it was worth it.
Chuck D.
----- Original Message -----
From: Phil Maxson <pmaxson(at)interactive.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
>
> Chuck Deiterich wrote:
>
> > My 701 fuel tank senders are in recessed holes in top of tank, I just
put
> > access covers over them to work on them if needed.
>
> Nicely done. Did you put in the recessed holes or did Zenith? If you,
> how?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Phil Maxson
> 601XL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)tstar.net> |
"zenith-list"
Carl,
I'm not flying yet. The 10 gallon tanks actually hold over 11 gal. I don't
know how much is unusable yet but estimate a little over a gallon per tank.
ZAC has said that only wing tanks are ok. I plan to have an electric boost
pump for takeoff and landing and the engine pump for all the time. I will
have a shutoff for each tank close to where the fuel line leaves the wing.
In flight I am thinking I'll run on one tank. I don't know what will happen
if both tanks are feeding and one runs dry. I'm not sure if the tank with
gas will feed ok or if the system will just suck air. However, gravity
should help the gas to keep flowing from the non empty tank.
Climbs the fuel will be at the back of the tank where the outlet is.
Steep nose down descents could be a problem with a very low tank (part of
the reason for flying on one tank and possibly landing with only the fullest
tank). I would suspect that with both tanks open the fuel level would
balance out as the lines from both tanks will be joined before going to the
gascolator and pump. Check valves at the tanks would prevent cross feeding
but I would suspect that they would also put a real damper on gravity feed.
Steep slips could be a problem if feeding only from a low "down wing" tank.
I looked at these issues before deciding to go with only wing tanks, but
forget the exact numbers and will study them some more before flying.
Anybody got any thoughts on this?
Chuck D.
----- Original Message -----
From: Carl Bertrand <cgbrt(at)mondenet.com>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
> Hi Chuck.
> Can ou tell me a bit about how you assure continuous fuel flow from your
> wing tanks in steep climbs/decents/unusual attitudes/sideslips etc? Also
> about operations, do you feed both tanks at same time? how low can you run
> your tanks safely?
> Carl
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Deiterich <cfd(at)tstar.net>
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: December 31, 2000 4:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
>
> >
> >My 701 fuel tank senders are in recessed holes in top of tank, I just put
> >access covers over them to work on them if needed. See photos on my web
> >page under Wing Tanks. By the way I only have wing tanks no header tank.
> >http://pages.tstar.net/~cfd/
> >Chuck D.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Humphries <paul.humphries1(at)virgin.net> |
Happy new year to everybody.
Can anyone tell me how Zenair make the wing ribs included in the kits /
Do they hand form as per the plans / manual or press out in one action
on an industrial machine.
Thanks.
Paul Humphries.
Stoke-on-Trent,
Staffs.,
UK.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Sa <wings1(at)videotron.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: CH701 wing ribs |
Hello, Paul
I remember having seen in a Zenair video the rib manufacturing process:
it is made in a industrial machine, but they are (were?) made one by
one, the machine being loaded/unloaded manually...
Happy New Year, everyone
Carlos Sa
Montreal, Canada
> Can anyone tell me how Zenair make the wing ribs included in the kits /
> Do they hand form as per the plans / manual or press out in one action
> on an industrial machine.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Paul Humphries.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <rich(at)carol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
I haven't read the revs yet but the pre-assembled spars are very long
& will not be perfectly straight. Build more of those wooden squares or
like I did, you can use string tied to the spar tips & pulled & tied in
the correct direction to help keep it straight while drilling the
skins & spar.
Rich
801
Z4T143(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Before beginning the wing kit for our 801 project, I am trying to compile all
> lessons learned and updates from others. Do any of you fellow 801ers have
> any words of wisdom about the wing kit other than the 10/24/00 updates shown
> on the ZAC web site?
>
> Thx,
>
> Dave Zilz
> St. Peters MO
> e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
> web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <rich(at)carol.net> |
I used VersaChem Type 2. The package says that it's fuel resistant &
stays pliable but in the winter I noticed that it got bretty hard & I
was ably to crack & peel it with my finger. So Now I need something
else. Has anyone tried using proseal? I have some leftover.
Rich
801
Phil Maxson wrote:
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Re: CH701 wing ribs |
At 12:20 2001.01.01., you wrote:
>
>Happy new year to everybody.
>
>Can anyone tell me how Zenair make the wing ribs included in the kits /
>Do they hand form as per the plans / manual or press out in one action
>on an industrial machine.
I was at the November workshop, and they were forming all the ribs by hand
around a metal form, and not with a pneumatic hammer, either. I spoke with
one of the workers, commenting on the stamina of his arms!.
Gary Liming
801 builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au> |
If you ever had to disassemble this sort of wing tank installation method it
would be a major pain in the arse. You'd have to cut the bottom skin and
then cut into material with a long knife and then drop the tank out whole.
But if you had to repair a tank or wign with the cork method it would also
be a pain in the arse.
Mind you, I don't ever want to have to repair the wing or the tank.
regards,
Mike B.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of HOLCOMBE
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
What happens if you have to disassemble to repair the tank or the wing?
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: <Z4T143(at)aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 11:47 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
> I'd like to see a photo of the foam method for fuel tank placement. Are
> there any known draw-backs to this approach? Please e-mail me.
>
> Thx
>
> Dave Zilz
> St. Peters MO
> e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
> web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
That is how I am doing mine. C 150s are set up this way except they only use
a single shut off for both tanks which can always cross feed and level. The
important thing is to not run out.
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck Deiterich <cfd(at)tstar.net>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
> Carl,
> I'm not flying yet. The 10 gallon tanks actually hold over 11 gal. I
don't
> know how much is unusable yet but estimate a little over a gallon per
tank.
> ZAC has said that only wing tanks are ok. I plan to have an electric
boost
> pump for takeoff and landing and the engine pump for all the time. I will
> have a shutoff for each tank close to where the fuel line leaves the wing.
> In flight I am thinking I'll run on one tank. I don't know what will
happen
> if both tanks are feeding and one runs dry. I'm not sure if the tank with
> gas will feed ok or if the system will just suck air. However, gravity
> should help the gas to keep flowing from the non empty tank.
> Climbs the fuel will be at the back of the tank where the outlet is.
> Steep nose down descents could be a problem with a very low tank (part of
> the reason for flying on one tank and possibly landing with only the
fullest
> tank). I would suspect that with both tanks open the fuel level would
> balance out as the lines from both tanks will be joined before going to
the
> gascolator and pump. Check valves at the tanks would prevent cross
feeding
> but I would suspect that they would also put a real damper on gravity
feed.
> Steep slips could be a problem if feeding only from a low "down wing"
tank.
> I looked at these issues before deciding to go with only wing tanks, but
> forget the exact numbers and will study them some more before flying.
>
> Anybody got any thoughts on this?
>
> Chuck D.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Carl Bertrand <cgbrt(at)mondenet.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 8:44 AM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
>
> > Hi Chuck.
> > Can ou tell me a bit about how you assure continuous fuel flow from your
> > wing tanks in steep climbs/decents/unusual attitudes/sideslips etc? Also
> > about operations, do you feed both tanks at same time? how low can you
run
> > your tanks safely?
> > Carl
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chuck Deiterich <cfd(at)tstar.net>
> > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Date: December 31, 2000 4:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
> >
> >
> > >
> > >My 701 fuel tank senders are in recessed holes in top of tank, I just
put
> > >access covers over them to work on them if needed. See photos on my
web
> > >page under Wing Tanks. By the way I only have wing tanks no header
tank.
> > >http://pages.tstar.net/~cfd/
> > >Chuck D.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CH701 wing ribs |
They have nice dies and a big machine. However I have seen hand formed ones
every bit as good.
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Humphries <paul.humphries1(at)virgin.net>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 10:20 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: CH701 wing ribs
>
> Happy new year to everybody.
>
> Can anyone tell me how Zenair make the wing ribs included in the kits /
> Do they hand form as per the plans / manual or press out in one action
> on an industrial machine.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Paul Humphries.
> Stoke-on-Trent,
> Staffs.,
> UK.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Dave,
Don't forget to install the tie down rings in each wing per Drawing
8ZV-01.pdf
(I had to ask ZAC to send me these since they were not originally
included in the kit).
Also, my EAA technical counselor thought that I should use aluminum
tubing for the fuel lines inside
the wings vs. the rubber hose supplied by ZAC (mainly for durability /
maintenance reasons.)
This is more work but should pay off in the long run.
Good Luck
Ulrich LaFosse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry" <jself1(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | FS: Zodiac 601HD kit |
Note: Now January and the price is $7,000. Zenair 601HD quick build kit that
I have not worked on recently. Paid $12,620.00 on 30 June 1997 for kit.
Completed the rudder, right wing and 60% of left wing. Will sell for $10,000
during October and will reduce price by $1000 each month until sold or offer
withdrawn. - Jerry Self 704-434-7435 jself1(at)carolina.rr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy L. Thwing" <n4546v(at)mindspring.com> |
I too, intend to use only wing tanks, but I am seriously thinking about
developing a 1/2 or 1 gallon gascolater forward of the firewall from which
the engine is always drawing, regardless of attitude. This would function
the same as a small header tank, but would not be in the cockpit. It would
probably have to be vented into one of the wing tanks. This is still in the
conception stage so input is welcome. Is there a rule that a gascolater
must be small rather than large?
Regards,
Randy L. Thwing, 701 plans, 60 hp Franklin
>
> That is how I am doing mine. C 150s are set up this way except they only
use
> a single shut off for both tanks which can always cross feed and level.
The
> important thing is to not run out.
> Richard
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chuck Deiterich <cfd(at)tstar.net>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
Hi Chuck,
there's lot in the archives about that topic; you might want to check that
out. In my plane (601 HDS) I have L/E wing tanks only. From there the fuel
is pumped (electrical pumps, mounted in the most outboard bay on both sides
of the centerwing) to the gascalator. Shut-off valves are installed on both
sides of the cabin. However, they are only used for emergencies (in case, I
hace to shut off the fuel due to a fire or off-airport landing).
Furthermore, check valves are installed in both fuel lines. The fuel lines
merge at the gascalator mounted rear of the firewall. From here, a fuel line
goes to the engine driven fuel pump and then further to the carburetors. The
electrical fuel pumps are running all the time. I switch between tanks by
switching from on electrical fuel pump to the other.
There are a few reasons for that kind of design:
- it's simple
- redundancy (if 1 fuel pump fails, there are still two more)
- don't need to remember to switch on fuel pumps during take-offs or
landings
- fuel is not sucked to the engine, but rather pushed by one of the
electrical fuel pumps. That way, the fuel lines stay pressurized all time,
which reduces the risk of vapor lock dramatically. Keep in mind, that the
autogas used by all the auto conversions as well as the Rotax is much more
prone to vapor lock than 100 LL.
Thilo Kind
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Chuck
> Deiterich
> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 12:02 PM
> To: Carl Bertrand; zenith-list
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
>
> Carl,
> I'm not flying yet. The 10 gallon tanks actually hold over
> 11 gal. I don't
> know how much is unusable yet but estimate a little over a
> gallon per tank.
> ZAC has said that only wing tanks are ok. I plan to have an
> electric boost
> pump for takeoff and landing and the engine pump for all the
> time. I will
> have a shutoff for each tank close to where the fuel line
> leaves the wing.
> In flight I am thinking I'll run on one tank. I don't know
> what will happen
> if both tanks are feeding and one runs dry. I'm not sure if
> the tank with
> gas will feed ok or if the system will just suck air.
> However, gravity
> should help the gas to keep flowing from the non empty tank.
> Climbs the fuel will be at the back of the tank where the outlet is.
> Steep nose down descents could be a problem with a very low
> tank (part of
> the reason for flying on one tank and possibly landing with
> only the fullest
> tank). I would suspect that with both tanks open the fuel level would
> balance out as the lines from both tanks will be joined
> before going to the
> gascolator and pump. Check valves at the tanks would prevent
> cross feeding
> but I would suspect that they would also put a real damper on
> gravity feed.
> Steep slips could be a problem if feeding only from a low
> "down wing" tank.
> I looked at these issues before deciding to go with only wing
> tanks, but
> forget the exact numbers and will study them some more before flying.
>
> Anybody got any thoughts on this?
>
> Chuck D.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Carl Bertrand <cgbrt(at)mondenet.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 8:44 AM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
>
> > Hi Chuck.
> > Can ou tell me a bit about how you assure continuous fuel
> flow from your
> > wing tanks in steep climbs/decents/unusual
> attitudes/sideslips etc? Also
> > about operations, do you feed both tanks at same time? how
> low can you run
> > your tanks safely?
> > Carl
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chuck Deiterich <cfd(at)tstar.net>
> > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Date: December 31, 2000 4:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
> >
> >
>
> > >
> > >My 701 fuel tank senders are in recessed holes in top of
> tank, I just put
> > >access covers over them to work on them if needed. See
> photos on my web
> > >page under Wing Tanks. By the way I only have wing tanks
> no header tank.
> > >http://pages.tstar.net/~cfd/
> > >Chuck D.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walt Cannon" <grnlake(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Zenith-List Digest: 19 Msgs - 12/30/00 |
Sorry to have to use the list...but Carl Bertrand could you E-mail me
directly?? I have tried to E-mail you on three different occasions but
always get some kind of delivery error
Thanks
Walt Cannon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: FS: Zodiac 601HD kit |
In a message dated 1/1/01 6:30:54 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
jself1(at)carolina.rr.com writes:
> Zenair 601HD quick build kit that
>
What did Zenith consider a quick build kit in 1997? To the best of my
knowledge they don't have a quick build kit. At least not on the same line
as the RV quick builds.....
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Walker" <dwalker3dw(at)dellnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FS: Zodiac 601HD kit Quick build |
They had a kit that was shipped with the fuselage assembled and clecoed
together with the skins on. Don
----- Original Message -----
From: <STEFREE(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: FS: Zodiac 601HD kit
>
> In a message dated 1/1/01 6:30:54 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> jself1(at)carolina.rr.com writes:
>
>
> > Zenair 601HD quick build kit that
> >
>
> What did Zenith consider a quick build kit in 1997? To the best of my
> knowledge they don't have a quick build kit. At least not on the same
line
> as the RV quick builds.....
>
> Steve
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | CH-701 mods applicable to CH-801? |
| From: | <jegreen(at)cdc.net> |
Carl, I was interested to read that you built a set of wings for your 701. I
understand that they are of your own design, not the Dedalius wings. I am an
801 builder. How difficult do you think it would be to take your design and
extrapolate it for the 801? Also, do any of your other mods apply to the 801?
Thanks,
Jeff
> From: "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt(at)mondenet.com>
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Zenith-List Digest: 20 Msgs - 12/29/00
>
>
> I have made a large number of changes; the latest being a new set of wings
> using a new airfoil and retractable slats, this in the hope of a better
> cruise speed. So far I have an increase of 10% and with the improvements I
> am presently incorporating I am hopefull of getting a further 10%. That mod
> has been a lot of work (design,testing of airfoils,building testing,
> modifying ect.) for an extra 12 kts but it has kept me occupied for two long
> Canadian winters
> If you get serious about building a 701 drop me a line and I will suggest
> some mods to you.
> Carl
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | CH-701 mods applicable to CH-801? |
| From: | <jegreen(at)cdc.net> |
Carl, I was interested to read that you built a set of wings for your 701. I
understand that they are of your own design, not the Dedalius wings. I am an
801 builder. How difficult do you think it would be to take your design and
extrapolate it for the 801? Also, do any of your other mods apply to the 801?
Thanks,
Jeff
> From: "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt(at)mondenet.com>
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Zenith-List Digest: 20 Msgs - 12/29/00
>
>
> I have made a large number of changes; the latest being a new set of wings
> using a new airfoil and retractable slats, this in the hope of a better
> cruise speed. So far I have an increase of 10% and with the improvements I
> am presently incorporating I am hopefull of getting a further 10%. That mod
> has been a lot of work (design,testing of airfoils,building testing,
> modifying ect.) for an extra 12 kts but it has kept me occupied for two long
> Canadian winters
> If you get serious about building a 701 drop me a line and I will suggest
> some mods to you.
> Carl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MSandidg(at)peabodygroup.com (Mark Sandidge) |
Date: Jan 1, 2001
From: Mark Sandidge (msandidg(at)peabodygroup.com)
Subject: Access Door
Getting ready to run control cables and would like to put in access
door/cover. Archives mentioned one builder who put one in the bottom
of rear fuse at the forward end. What have others done to provide
access to cables. Will I need to reinforce the area around door?
Thanks
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Pinneo <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Nose Ribs # 7 for HDS |
I'm flying out of Corona Muni.
George Pinneo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Pinneo <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com> |
| Subject: | Is George out there.. |
george.pinneo(at)trw.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael R Fortunato <wizard-24(at)juno.com> |
> How close to the leading edge do you plan to move the sender? I'm
> not convinced that moving it closer to the bend down the middle of the
> top of the tank (5th bend?) will help anything. That bend (with cork
> over it) touches the skin. It appears to me that moving closer to the
> spar would do it. Please give me your opinion.
I actually pondered the fuel sender situation for quite a while, and came
to the same conclusion - the only way it would clear is to mount it
closer to the spar --- and that may not even work (you're right....closer
to the 5th bend would be impossible). I plan to play with it more next
weekend, but if it won't work, I'll just use an access cover like you and
others have suggested. I'm just not sure how to make a cover with a
"bump" in it that looks OK.
Mike Fortunato
601XL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)tstar.net> |
I did a little geometry to see what the 701 wing tanks usable fuel is and
how steep you can pitch down and bank in a slip (uncoordinated bank). Here's
what I found.
The tank is 555 mm side to side, 490 mm front to back, 200 high in front and
100 mm high in back. The fuel outlet is at the back on the inboard side
with the top of the hole about 30 mm from the bottom. I measured the "10"
gallon tank to be 11.3 gal.
With the bottom of the tank level it takes 2.3 gal to cover the outlet hole.
With the 701 dihedral it takes about 1.7 gal to cover the outlet.
With 2 more gallons (4.3 total) you can pitch down 6 degrees before
uncovering the outlet,
You can bank in a slip to about 6 degrees (with the dihedral) before
uncovering the outlet on the wing down tank, this gives a .6 gal pad with
dihedral. Of course no sloshing is considered.
----- Original Message -----
From: HOLCOMBE <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 6:34 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
> That is how I am doing mine. C 150s are set up this way except they only
use
> a single shut off for both tanks which can always cross feed and level.
The
> important thing is to not run out.
> Richard
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chuck Deiterich <cfd(at)tstar.net>
> To: Carl Bertrand ; zenith-list
>
> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 9:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fuel Tanks
>
>
> >
> > Carl,
> > I'm not flying yet. The 10 gallon tanks actually hold over 11 gal. I
> > don't know how much is unusable yet but estimate a little over a gallon
per
> > tank. ZAC has said that only wing tanks are ok. I plan to have an
electric
> > boost pump for takeoff and landing and the engine pump for all the time.
I will
> > have a shutoff for each tank close to where the fuel line leaves the
wing.
> > In flight I am thinking I'll run on one tank. I don't know what will
> > happen if both tanks are feeding and one runs dry. I'm not sure if the
tank with
> > gas will feed ok or if the system will just suck air. However, gravity
> > should help the gas to keep flowing from the non empty tank.
> > Climbs the fuel will be at the back of the tank where the outlet is.
> > Steep nose down descents could be a problem with a very low tank (part
of
> > the reason for flying on one tank and possibly landing with only the
> > fullest tank). I would suspect that with both tanks open the fuel level
would
> > balance out as the lines from both tanks will be joined before going to
> > the gascolator and pump. Check valves at the tanks would prevent cross
> > feeding but I would suspect that they would also put a real damper on
gravity
> > feed. Steep slips could be a problem if feeding only from a low "down
wing"
> > tank.
> > I looked at these issues before deciding to go with only wing tanks, but
> > forget the exact numbers and will study them some more before flying.
> >
> > Anybody got any thoughts on this?
> >
> > Chuck D.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Fw: In-flight adjustable prop for Rotax 912 - also 601HD |
outer wings
Subject: In-flight adjustable prop for Rotax 912 - also 601HD outer wings
I note that there are several new people on the list and it has been some
time since I put the following out as assistance to fellow builders:
In-flight adjustable IVO prop for sale. 66 inch diameter, red, fits 912
engine with 100 mm diameter bolt pattern. Has flown approx 200 hours.
$400
US or $600 CDN. This prop added approx 7/8 mph cruise (over a GSC set to
cruise pitch) and significantly improved climb.
601HD outer wings, with approx 250 hrs, (I have changed to HDS wings),
going
for $1500 US or $2000 CDN. These could really speed up your project.
This is a repeat message with prices dropped significantly!
Reply to daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca
Dave Austin 601HDS 460 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
I'm just not sure how to make a cover with a
> "bump" in it that looks OK.
>
> Mike Fortunato
> 601XL
>
>
Ball pean hammer on about .025 or .035 against the flat of an anvel.
Many small blows working out from the center then all over except the outer
1/2 inch of a circular piece about 5 inches in diameter.
Then polish the outside starting with about 100 wet or dry.
Richard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Maxson <pmaxson(at)interactive.net> |
> I'm just not sure how to make a cover with a
> "bump" in it that looks OK.
I used an extremely high tech method. I drilled a one inch hole through
two boards and used a couple of dowels to keep the holes in alignment.
I radiused the edge of one of the holes and clamped the cover (already
cut to size) between the boards. I then stuck in the rounded tipped
handle of a toilet bowl plunger (a little smaller diameter than the one
inch hole) and whacked it a couple of times! I needed about 5 mm and I
kept whacking and measuring until I got what I needed. If you whack to
hard enough it'll go right through! (Guess how I discovered that)
I could have used a broom handle, but I wanted to use the toilet bowl
plunger. I thought it would help my passengers to feel more confident
if they knew some of the parts were fabricated with a plunger handle.
Phil Maxson
601XL
Tools are everywhere. You just have to know what you're looking for.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS" <aircraft(at)CZAW.CZ> |
I believe Zenith did offer their version of a QBK then. Now CZAW makes all
> QBK, 100% finished airframes, and ready-to-fly aircraft. Due to our low
> labor costs (and highly skilled aircraft workers) we can offer more
assembly
> for less costs. Our assembled kits are available through Zenith or
Airlink.
> Floats too!
>
> Happy New Year,
> CHIP
>
> Chip W. Erwin
> CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS
> Lucn 1824
> 686 02 Stare Mesto, Czech Republic
> Tel: (420 632) 543 456 Mobile (420) 602 342 717
> Fax: (420 632) 543 692 USA Fax: (561) 264 0936
> aircraft(at)czaw.cz www.czaw.cz
> <http://www.czaw.cz>
>
> > Zenair 601HD quick build kit that
> >
>
> What did Zenith consider a quick build kit in 1997? To the best of my
> knowledge they don't have a quick build kit. At least not on the same
line
> as the RV quick builds.....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger & Mary" <rkmk(at)erols.com> |
N98RK made her first flight today!
All went very well with the exception of being slightly heavy on the left
side, of course
my 200lbs didn't help that any. I will probably add a trim tab to the
ailerons.
It is hard to believe it was about 3 years ago when, as we inventoried the
kit, my dad
asked if I really thought we would ever get to the bottom of those boxes of
rivets. Todays
flight sure made it worthwhile!
Roger Kilby
N98RK - 601HDS
P.S. My infant daughter finally got home from the hospital yesterday and is
doing well.
Thanks to all those who kept us in their prayers and thoughts.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Morelli" <billvt(at)together.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight |
Roger,
Best of luck to your daughter and congrats on the flight.
Bill
do no archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cliffsuss(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight |
In a message dated 1/3/01 8:13:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, rkmk(at)erols.com
writes:
> N98RK made her first flight today!
>
> Congratulations on both great events. With all that good luck, maybe you
> should go out and buy a lottery ticket!!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS" <aircraft(at)CZAW.CZ> |
Dear Walt,
I have a lot of recent experience with several 701s on floats. I have flown
them on several trips with different 701s from Czech Republic to England,
Spain, France, Italy, and Greece. This includes 2 trips over the Alps. And I
have given probably more than 100 demo rides and made countless water,
grass, and hard-surface landings. I can tell you that the 701 is really a
great 'sportsman's bushplane'. And I am flying at gross weight most of the
time. As far as I am concerned (and most others) it is a "real aircraft". It
sure feels and flys like one.
I have a factory here making more than six 701s every month. They turn out
light, trimmed (built on jigs), and well performing. Our float model is
best equipped with long-rang wing tanks (no fuselage tank), VSI, and Rotax
912ULS. Not much more is needed except for the intercom with stereo
music-out port, ANR headsets, and CD player!
You have asked some good questions but I do not foresee any problems for
you. There might be a few cockpit adjustments to be made to fit you better.
Contract me direct if you would like more details, or visit our web site.
Cheers,
CHIP
CHIP W. ERWIN
CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS, S.R.O
Lucni 1824
686 06 Stare Mesto
Czech Republic
Tel: 420 632 543 456 Mobile: 420 602 342 717
Fax: 420 632 543 692 USA Fax: 561 264 0936
E-mail: aircraft(at)czaw.cz Web address: www.czaw.cz
All,
I have been lurking on the list for a while, taking in information about
Zenith in general. I am a relatively experienced builder...having restored a
T-18 and built an RV-6. The RV was flown and sold about 4 months ago. I am
missing building and would like to move to the other end of the scale and
start a CH701. I did get an opportunity to fly the factory demonstrator in
Mexico, but that can hardly be described as a full fledged evaluation. I
would like to hear from anyone who has a CH701 flying about the following
topics. Feel free to respond directly to me instead of the list if you don't
want to bore a lot of other people with the details
I would probably use a 912 or 912S since light weight would be very
important. Anybody with a 912S want to comment on the advantages of that
choice. Can it use the same premium auto gas? Is the higher compression a
big factor in shorter life or dependability?
Do people find that you can actually use this as a "real plane" or is it
relegated to more of a fair weather ultralight type usage?
Has anybody made any long cross countries in a CH701 that they would like to
share. It would be slow, but seems like great fun as you could see
everything and land in numerous great places.
Will the 912 provide enough power to fly well off of amphibious floats? How
does the 701 fly with amphibs when it is in the air? Seems like a lot of
drag on an already draggy airframe. Does it sink like a rock?
Anybody using just the wing tanks with no header? I don't like the idea of a
lap full of fuel.
If it is built to plan with the 912, does it perform OK with two normal
people on board and some baggage?
Has anybody made a baggage pod that is mounted underneath the fuselage?
Is it comfortable for someone that is around 6'2" tall? Any special mods
that you made?
I will look forward to people opinions on these questions or anything else
they would like to offer to a person contemplating starting a 701.
Walt Cannon
Seattle Wa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph Llewellyn" <llewellyn(at)tinet.ie> |
| Subject: | Re: 701 on floats |
Chip
Your exploits in 701 are very impressive, some of which I learned at
Cranfield airshow (UK) last year.
Can you tell me what is the payload which your configuration of 701 on
floats has.
Thank You
Ralph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dick Baner <db8(at)mtco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 701 on floats |
Chip, I am replying on list as some others may be interested in your answer.
When you say you are flying at gross, what do you consider to be gross in a
float setup and what do you consider it to be with bush gear? My plane is
almost at the original gross per plans of 980 lbs with only me in it and full
gas so the question is significant to me. I now have the set of replacement
slats you built me installed and waiting for summer. Great job on them. Dick
Baner
CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS wrote:
>
> Dear Walt,
>
> I have a lot of recent experience with several 701s on floats. I have flown
> them on several trips with different 701s from Czech Republic to England,
> Spain, France, Italy, and Greece. This includes 2 trips over the Alps. And I
> have given probably more than 100 demo rides and made countless water,
> grass, and hard-surface landings. I can tell you that the 701 is really a
> great 'sportsman's bushplane'. And I am flying at gross weight most of the
> time. As far as I am concerned (and most others) it is a "real aircraft". It
> sure feels and flys like one.
>
> I have a factory here making more than six 701s every month. They turn out
> light, trimmed (built on jigs), and well performing. Our float model is
> best equipped with long-rang wing tanks (no fuselage tank), VSI, and Rotax
> 912ULS. Not much more is needed except for the intercom with stereo
> music-out port, ANR headsets, and CD player!
>
> You have asked some good questions but I do not foresee any problems for
> you. There might be a few cockpit adjustments to be made to fit you better.
>
> Contract me direct if you would like more details, or visit our web site.
>
> Cheers,
> CHIP
>
> CHIP W. ERWIN
> CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS, S.R.O
> Lucni 1824
> 686 06 Stare Mesto
> Czech Republic
> Tel: 420 632 543 456 Mobile: 420 602 342 717
> Fax: 420 632 543 692 USA Fax: 561 264 0936
> E-mail: aircraft(at)czaw.cz Web address: www.czaw.cz
>
>
> All,
>
> I have been lurking on the list for a while, taking in information about
> Zenith in general. I am a relatively experienced builder...having restored a
> T-18 and built an RV-6. The RV was flown and sold about 4 months ago. I am
> missing building and would like to move to the other end of the scale and
> start a CH701. I did get an opportunity to fly the factory demonstrator in
> Mexico, but that can hardly be described as a full fledged evaluation. I
> would like to hear from anyone who has a CH701 flying about the following
> topics. Feel free to respond directly to me instead of the list if you don't
> want to bore a lot of other people with the details
>
> I would probably use a 912 or 912S since light weight would be very
> important. Anybody with a 912S want to comment on the advantages of that
> choice. Can it use the same premium auto gas? Is the higher compression a
> big factor in shorter life or dependability?
>
> Do people find that you can actually use this as a "real plane" or is it
> relegated to more of a fair weather ultralight type usage?
>
> Has anybody made any long cross countries in a CH701 that they would like to
> share. It would be slow, but seems like great fun as you could see
> everything and land in numerous great places.
>
> Will the 912 provide enough power to fly well off of amphibious floats? How
> does the 701 fly with amphibs when it is in the air? Seems like a lot of
> drag on an already draggy airframe. Does it sink like a rock?
>
> Anybody using just the wing tanks with no header? I don't like the idea of a
> lap full of fuel.
>
> If it is built to plan with the 912, does it perform OK with two normal
> people on board and some baggage?
>
> Has anybody made a baggage pod that is mounted underneath the fuselage?
>
> Is it comfortable for someone that is around 6'2" tall? Any special mods
> that you made?
>
> I will look forward to people opinions on these questions or anything else
> they would like to offer to a person contemplating starting a 701.
>
> Walt Cannon
> Seattle Wa
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS" <aircraft(at)CZAW.CZ> |
Ralph,
We calculate about 180 kg payload. Depends on the empty weight, which
depends on how many gadgets the customer orders.
It is the same with our without floats as the floats support their own
weight in the air, and the stability profile is different. This is common
with floatplanes.
But we do have 100 liters fuel capacity. I use it all when I fly long legs
alone but with a lot of baggage. I would be over gross with that much fuel,
full baggage and 2 people. But so would most aircraft, including the Cessna
172.
For local flying I generally have 10-15 liters in one wing tank for reserve
and an hour or 2 fuel in the active tank. Then I can give demo rides or take
short flights without worry. Sometimes I get some pretty big passengers!
BTW, we just shipped a very beautiful 701. Metallic paint, leather seats,
full Lexan doors, and in-dash GPS/Nav, transponder, intercom, CD jack,
gyros.... Maybe it was partially the dense winter air here but that 701
really flew well. Deluxe. See our web page for a couple photos.
Cheers,
CHIP
CHIP W. ERWIN
CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS, S.R.O
Lucni 1824
686 06 Stare Mesto
Czech Republic
Tel: 420 632 543 456 Mobile: 420 602 342 717
Fax: 420 632 543 692 USA Fax: 561 264 0936
E-mail: aircraft(at)czaw.cz Web address: www.czaw.cz
Chip
Your exploits in 701 are very impressive, some of which I learned at
Cranfield airshow (UK) last year.
Can you tell me what is the payload which your configuration of 701 on
floats has.
Thank You
Ralph
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au> |
Walt,
My opinion is that the 701 will do what ever you want it to. If you want to
to long distance flights it can do it. I have a friend who flew from central
queensland to the center of Australia and then up to northern queensland in
a week. The whole trip was 2200nm. ON the middle leg there was 2 701's
flying together. At the end of it he just wanted to keep on flying. The 701
is a beuatiful aircraft to fly.
I liked it so much I'm building 2 of them. One for me and one for my
brother. But there is one thing I would have to say. IF i didn't know better
I would say that there are parts of the plans that were made to confuse the
builder. I am a professional engineer and I find some of the plans very hard
to understand. If you are building a 601 it would be a different story
because zenith have put a lot more work into the plans and manual. But the
701 plans and manual are hard in parts to inteperate and they badly badly
need a total revamp and update.
For example, I was putting together the firewalls for my machines this week.
The main horizontal reference line is supposed to be from the bottom of the
firewall 395mm on the drawings but in the latest revisions dated august last
year it said that 388mm was the correct dimension. I put the ref at 390
figuring a bit of extra height about the firewall wouldn't go astray. So
when I went to fit the engine mount to the clecoed firewall on firewall 1 I
found out that the engine mount was a bit larger than it should have been
and in order to get the bottom mount in the right place with the right gap
distance the reference line should have been at about 392mm. 395 and 388,
are not 392.
Because of the quality of the plans you have to figure out a lot of things
yourself. But it isn't a 747. There is a lot of give in the design and it is
very forgiving of mistakes that you make. The quality of the components is
superb and the build process isvery simple and all the same. If I were to
make it from scratch I would make the skins a bit thicker but that is more
for aesthetic and noise reasons than anything else.
hope this helps
Mike B.
2 701's 440Hrs tt, both flying surfaces done, both rear fuses semi complete,
firewalls done, working on the cabin parts.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of CZECH
AIRCRAFT WORKS
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:46 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 701 on floats
Dear Walt,
I have a lot of recent experience with several 701s on floats. I have flown
them on several trips with different 701s from Czech Republic to England,
Spain, France, Italy, and Greece. This includes 2 trips over the Alps. And I
have given probably more than 100 demo rides and made countless water,
grass, and hard-surface landings. I can tell you that the 701 is really a
great 'sportsman's bushplane'. And I am flying at gross weight most of the
time. As far as I am concerned (and most others) it is a "real aircraft". It
sure feels and flys like one.
I have a factory here making more than six 701s every month. They turn out
light, trimmed (built on jigs), and well performing. Our float model is
best equipped with long-rang wing tanks (no fuselage tank), VSI, and Rotax
912ULS. Not much more is needed except for the intercom with stereo
music-out port, ANR headsets, and CD player!
You have asked some good questions but I do not foresee any problems for
you. There might be a few cockpit adjustments to be made to fit you better.
Contract me direct if you would like more details, or visit our web site.
Cheers,
CHIP
CHIP W. ERWIN
CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS, S.R.O
Lucni 1824
686 06 Stare Mesto
Czech Republic
Tel: 420 632 543 456 Mobile: 420 602 342 717
Fax: 420 632 543 692 USA Fax: 561 264 0936
E-mail: aircraft(at)czaw.cz Web address: www.czaw.cz
All,
I have been lurking on the list for a while, taking in information about
Zenith in general. I am a relatively experienced builder...having restored a
T-18 and built an RV-6. The RV was flown and sold about 4 months ago. I am
missing building and would like to move to the other end of the scale and
start a CH701. I did get an opportunity to fly the factory demonstrator in
Mexico, but that can hardly be described as a full fledged evaluation. I
would like to hear from anyone who has a CH701 flying about the following
topics. Feel free to respond directly to me instead of the list if you don't
want to bore a lot of other people with the details
I would probably use a 912 or 912S since light weight would be very
important. Anybody with a 912S want to comment on the advantages of that
choice. Can it use the same premium auto gas? Is the higher compression a
big factor in shorter life or dependability?
Do people find that you can actually use this as a "real plane" or is it
relegated to more of a fair weather ultralight type usage?
Has anybody made any long cross countries in a CH701 that they would like to
share. It would be slow, but seems like great fun as you could see
everything and land in numerous great places.
Will the 912 provide enough power to fly well off of amphibious floats? How
does the 701 fly with amphibs when it is in the air? Seems like a lot of
drag on an already draggy airframe. Does it sink like a rock?
Anybody using just the wing tanks with no header? I don't like the idea of a
lap full of fuel.
If it is built to plan with the 912, does it perform OK with two normal
people on board and some baggage?
Has anybody made a baggage pod that is mounted underneath the fuselage?
Is it comfortable for someone that is around 6'2" tall? Any special mods
that you made?
I will look forward to people opinions on these questions or anything else
they would like to offer to a person contemplating starting a 701.
Walt Cannon
Seattle Wa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Garrou, Douglas" <DGarrou(at)hunton.com> |
| Subject: | Project 801 video |
I'd like to announce the premiere of what may be the first ever web video of
a Zenith 801 under construction. This visually stunning and essentially
pointless production can be seen by following the "video" links at the
Project 801 web page, www.geocities.com/dmg2
You may need to download and install a (free) recent version of Quicktime,
available for Windows and Mac at www.apple.com/quicktime/download We've
discovered that Windows Media Player will gamely try to play our videos but
will show only a blank screen and play audio. Perhaps it's a form of
criticism.
Blue skies,
Doug Garrou
p.s. Given recent discussions, I should warn you that the film includes
music, which can be controlled using the speaker button on the quicktime
display. A free clecoe to the first person to identify the song.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger & Mary" <rkmk(at)erols.com> |
Mark,
I made 2 access panels under the rear fuselage. One is a small circular
panel
which uses 3 screws into speed nut fasteners. The second is rectangular and
is
closer to the rear of the wing and uses rivnuts. I like them as they allow
me to inspect
the plastic fairleads located in the aft fuselage.
Roger Kilby
N98RK - 601HDS
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Can Matt Block IP Addresses? |
In a message dated 1/4/01 5:20:30 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
airplane_04282(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
If Matt can block IP addresses from the list, I post the first vote to block
airplane_04282(at)yahoo.com.
He is a drag.
Other forums would have banned him a long time ago.
Steve Freeman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Tellet" <telletdl(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Off topic? Or the ultimate topic? |
Nice thoughts well said. But I do think they should be archived.
David Tellet
----- Original Message -----
From: Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 12:48 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Off topic? Or the ultimate topic?
>
> ...
> > P.S. My infant daughter finally got home from the hospital yesterday and
is
> > doing well.
> > Thanks to all those who kept us in their prayers and thoughts.
>
> Hey all,
>
> Roger's update got me thinking. In the five or six years I've been on this
> list I've noted the following events going on 'in the background' :
>
> - a member's wife died;
>
> - another's wife left him, causing him to have to sell his project in the
> resultant turmoil;
>
> - another member seems to have used the building project as part of his
> recovery from a marriage breakdown, and at last report is flying happily
> with a new wife;
>
> - Roger's daughter is born in need of major heart surgery, and is now
> recovering well;
>
> - Many of us have experienced the discouragement and frustration of
making
> major (?) mistakes in the project. And without fail, the members of the
> list have been very helpful and encouraging as we've figured out the 'what
> now?'... and usually we've discovered that our mistakes are recoverable,
and
> the joy of building soon returns.
>
> - Several have reported the major excitement that accompanies that first
> flight; others have reported accomplishments like a 'first solo' or
> obtaining their pilot's licence;
>
> - Other's have been plugging along in the background with medical problems
> that have slowed down their construction and threatened their flying
> fitness, but have been encouraged on and off the list by fellow members.
>
> - I've seen the widowed-wife of a project (or aircraft?) owner, seeking
> advice about how to sell her husbands 'pet' now that she's left to deal
with
> life alone.
>
> - I've read of fellow listers experiencing hard landings, canopies blowing
> off, and engine failures resulting in forced landings.
>
> - and I've read of at least two or three fatal accidents in Zodiacs that
> remind me that flying is NOT like sitting in my living room. Really
> experiencing LIFE, going beyond the daily limitations, is dangerous and
life
> IS fragile.
>
> - and I'm reminded of Chris Heintz's note in the front of my construction
> manual about remembering our families and that this aircraft building
thing
> is after all, for most of us, a hobby. Real life goes on all around us and
> even 'invades' this list from time to time.
>
> - I'm thankful for that. It helps keep me focused on the REAL thing.
>
> Warm regards to y'all for the new Millenium. THIS is the millenium when
I'll
> finally get it finished and flying! I'm pretty sure.
>
> Grant Corriveau
> Montreal
> Zodiac 601hds/CAM100
> C-GHTF
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | joe mock <airplane_04282(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Off topic? Or the ultimate topic? |
use you're printa and post them up ova you're desk
--- David Tellet wrote:
>
>
> Nice thoughts well said. But I do think they should
> be archived.
>
> David Tellet
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 12:48 PM
> Subject: Zenith-List: Off topic? Or the ultimate
> topic?
>
>
>
> >
> > ...
> > > P.S. My infant daughter finally got home from
> the hospital yesterday and
> is
> > > doing well.
> > > Thanks to all those who kept us in their prayers
> and thoughts.
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > Roger's update got me thinking. In the five or six
> years I've been on this
> > list I've noted the following events going on 'in
> the background' :
> >
> > - a member's wife died;
> >
> > - another's wife left him, causing him to have to
> sell his project in the
> > resultant turmoil;
> >
> > - another member seems to have used the building
> project as part of his
> > recovery from a marriage breakdown, and at last
> report is flying happily
> > with a new wife;
> >
> > - Roger's daughter is born in need of major heart
> surgery, and is now
> > recovering well;
> >
> > - Many of us have experienced the discouragement
> and frustration of
> making
> > major (?) mistakes in the project. And without
> fail, the members of the
> > list have been very helpful and encouraging as
> we've figured out the 'what
> > now?'... and usually we've discovered that our
> mistakes are recoverable,
> and
> > the joy of building soon returns.
> >
> > - Several have reported the major excitement that
> accompanies that first
> > flight; others have reported accomplishments like
> a 'first solo' or
> > obtaining their pilot's licence;
> >
> > - Other's have been plugging along in the
> background with medical problems
> > that have slowed down their construction and
> threatened their flying
> > fitness, but have been encouraged on and off the
> list by fellow members.
> >
> > - I've seen the widowed-wife of a project (or
> aircraft?) owner, seeking
> > advice about how to sell her husbands 'pet' now
> that she's left to deal
> with
> > life alone.
> >
> > - I've read of fellow listers experiencing hard
> landings, canopies blowing
> > off, and engine failures resulting in forced
> landings.
> >
> > - and I've read of at least two or three fatal
> accidents in Zodiacs that
> > remind me that flying is NOT like sitting in my
> living room. Really
> > experiencing LIFE, going beyond the daily
> limitations, is dangerous and
> life
> > IS fragile.
> >
> > - and I'm reminded of Chris Heintz's note in the
> front of my construction
> > manual about remembering our families and that
> this aircraft building
> thing
> > is after all, for most of us, a hobby. Real life
> goes on all around us and
> > even 'invades' this list from time to time.
> >
> > - I'm thankful for that. It helps keep me focused
> on the REAL thing.
> >
> > Warm regards to y'all for the new Millenium. THIS
> is the millenium when
> I'll
> > finally get it finished and flying! I'm pretty
> sure.
> >
> > Grant Corriveau
> > Montreal
> > Zodiac 601hds/CAM100
> > C-GHTF
> >
> >
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Pelletier" <pelletie1(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Off topic? Or the ultimate topic? |
In french we said "Bien dit l'ami", I'm new on the list and I'll try to
remember that.
Daniel 601 HDS
Frame 100% completed
> >
> > - and I'm reminded of Chris Heintz's note in the front of my
>construction
> > manual about remembering our families and that this aircraft building
>thing
> > is after all, for most of us, a hobby. Real life goes on all around us
>and
> > even 'invades' this list from time to time.
> >
> > - I'm thankful for that. It helps keep me focused on the REAL thing.
> >
> > Warm regards to y'all for the new Millenium. THIS is the millenium when
>I'll
> > finally get it finished and flying! I'm pretty sure.
> >
> > Grant Corriveau
> > Montreal
> > Zodiac 601hds/CAM100
> > C-GHTF
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
| Subject: | Can Matt Block IP Addresses? |
Hi folks,
I fully agree with Grant. However, I don't agree with you. This is a free
country after all (even, if the presidential election gets decided by
court...) and everybody has the right to express his or her opinion. After
all, the DELETE button is in esay reach for all of us....
Thilo Kind
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> STEFREE(at)aol.com
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 7:57 PM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: Can Matt Block IP Addresses?
>
>
> In a message dated 1/4/01 5:20:30 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> airplane_04282(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
>
> >
>
> If Matt can block IP addresses from the list, I post the
> first vote to block
> airplane_04282(at)yahoo.com.
>
> He is a drag.
>
> Other forums would have banned him a long time ago.
>
> Steve Freeman
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robbie Mabry <cen68149(at)centurytel.net> |
Hi,
I'm new to this list and currently about 2/3s of the way
from completing a Stitts Flut-Er-Bug. I have the plans for
a 701 and at this point don't know if I will build it from
scratch or kit. I wish I had a list like this before
starting the Bug. I can see the 701 will go much smoother
with this windfall of first hand knowledge and experience.
My questions for the day are:
1. Money is tight, can anyone rec. an elec. tach. that will
work on an A-75 Cont. (no elec)?
2. I saw a post a week or two ago about building an
intercom. Are there plans out there for a home built
intercom that would work with a handheld?
Thanks, Robbie Mabry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Sa <wings1(at)videotron.ca> |
> My questions for the day are:
> 1. Money is tight, can anyone rec. an elec. tach. that will
> work on an A-75 Cont. (no elec)?
> 2. I saw a post a week or two ago about building an
> intercom. Are there plans out there for a home built
> intercom that would work with a handheld?
Robbie, take a look at Jim Wier's web site:
http://www.rst-engr.com/
He has a bunch of goodies, some of which might interest you.
Carlos
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Tarabocchia" <zodiac.builder(at)verizon.net> |
Robbie Mabry wrote:
> My questions for the day are:
> 1. Money is tight, can anyone rec. an elec. tach. that will
> work on an A-75 Cont. (no elec)?
(no elec)? Does that mean your ship does not have an electrical system?
If your ship does have an electrical system, you can find several low
cost electrical tachs in both Aircraft Spruce:
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/main.html & Wicks Aircraft:
http://www.wicksaircraft.com/catalogIndex.phtml.
You will find both direct electrical replacements, that tie into the
tach accessory housing, or units that will feed off a magneto. Several
units sell in the $200.00 range. I saw one that included pressure
sensitive range markers.
> 2. I saw a post a week or two ago about building an
> intercom. Are there plans out there for a home built
> intercom that would work with a handheld?
There is a neat little Audio Panel / Intercom from Delcom (
http://www.delc.com/int2000.htm ) that sells for $189.00 and was
designed to be used with standard Coms and/or handhelds. It will work
off the ships power or an internal battery.
Good luck,
--
John W. Tarabocchia
601hds N6042T Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
Airframe 100% Complete...
Installing Wire and Engine...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PWalsh8045(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Off topic? Or the ultimate topic? |
Well.....life is certainly full of twists and turns...sort of analogous to
airplane building...
Just for the record...I lost my 2 children...ages 16 and 14...in Nov of
97....I did have the chance to take both of them up one each in our
601HD...they just loved it!!.....
The point??....well, lets just say that it was one of the few things that
kept me interested in life at all after such a loss....and now, it has a
special meaning for me.
So, there is much more to building and flying than just building and
flying....just keep it in perspective....
My 2 cents worth.
Patrick Walsh
601 HD...200+ really great hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | New 801 Manual Updates |
FYI -
Nick just posted a new update to the 801 Assembly Manual.
http://www.zenithair.com/stolch801/manuals.html
Dave Zilz
St. Peters MO
e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au> |
| Subject: | New 801 Manual Updates |
I'm thrilled for the 801 builders. It would make the building that much
easier.
How about the same for 701 builders?
mike B.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Z4T143(at)aol.com
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 1:13 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: New 801 Manual Updates
FYI -
Nick just posted a new update to the 801 Assembly Manual.
http://www.zenithair.com/stolch801/manuals.html
Dave Zilz
St. Peters MO
e-mail: z4t143(at)aol.com
web site: www.geocities.com/z4t143/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | joe mock <airplane_04282(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Joe - getting bashed |
I started a response to all of your notes on this
thread and was ready to send it to "the site". As I
was just finishing my reply last night the messsage
from Patrick Walsh came in. Out of respect to him and
his family I thought it best to put this thread to
rest and only responded to the guy who wanted Joe
blocked. It makes me sad that some of you would
rather bash some one instead of show respect for what
he went through---- My condolences to you and your
family, Mr. Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | 601HD center wing rivet line |
Help, guys. I'm working on the bottom skin of the center wing of my 601HD.
The center-right drawing on 6-V-11 says that the rivet line at the front of
the bottom skin is A5 pitch 20, but not through the bottom L-shaped
spar extrusion. I have a couple of questions about that rivet line.
Is it true that the 6-V-11-5 extrusion isn't riveted to the spar extrusion,
just to the bottom and nose skin? In fact, are there NO rivets through
the spar extrusion to attach the bottom and nose skins, or have I missed
a drawing somewhere? Also, to respect the 10 mm edge distance on
the bottom skin, it looks like the front rivet in 6-V-11-5 is about 16 mm
back from the leading edge. Is that everybody's experience?
Thanks for any help.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing rivet line |
| From: | Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net> |
on 1/6/01 9:34 PM, Bill Steer at bsteer(at)gwi.net wrote:
>
> Help, guys. I'm working on the bottom skin of the center wing of my 601HD.
> The center-right drawing on 6-V-11 says that the rivet line at the front of
> the bottom skin is A5 pitch 20, but not through the bottom L-shaped
> spar extrusion. I have a couple of questions about that rivet line.
>
> Is it true that the 6-V-11-5 extrusion isn't riveted to the spar extrusion,
> just to the bottom and nose skin? In fact, are there NO rivets through
> the spar extrusion to attach the bottom and nose skins, or have I missed
> a drawing somewhere? Also, to respect the 10 mm edge distance on
> the bottom skin, it looks like the front rivet in 6-V-11-5 is about 16 mm
> back from the leading edge. Is that everybody's experience?
>
> Thanks for any help.
>
> Bill
Bill,
It's been a while since I was there, and my aircraft is out in the garage,
but.... I think that the A5 pitch 20 you refer to may be referring to the
line of rivets along the gear extrusion 6v11-5.
As I recall, I used the note at the top left of the page that says "use the
same rivet pitch on bottom skin". I don't recall if I used a single row of
A5 at p35 along the bottom skin to spar flange, or if I also used a second
line at P20 through the skin overlaps. I can go out and check fwiw, but
you'll probably get a more definitive answer from some others on the list.
Now that you've raised the question, I'll be watching the reply myself!
Hope this helps a little...
--
Grant Corriveau
Montreal
Zodiac 601hds/CAM100
C-GHTF
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Latimer" <ljm10587(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing rivet line |
Bill,
I have just finished my center wing section, so hopefully I'm current and
used the right dimension.
I measured my spacing and I used A5 P40. The actual spacing is actually a
little less than 40.
I believe I determined that by using the drawing 6V11. On the left center
of the non cad drawings just above the top skin & framework drawing and just
below "Top View" that reads "same rivet pitch on the bottom. So you use the
same pitches top and bottom. On the drawing in left bottom corner which
shows the framework with both rear and nose skins in place there is an arrow
pointing to the overlap of nose and rear skins and it states to use A5 P40.
Hope this helps.
Jerry Latimer
CH601HDS
Just started the rear fuselage
All flying surfaces complete.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 7:34 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 601HD center wing rivet line
>
> Help, guys. I'm working on the bottom skin of the center wing of my
601HD.
> The center-right drawing on 6-V-11 says that the rivet line at the front
of
> the bottom skin is A5 pitch 20, but not through the bottom L-shaped
> spar extrusion. I have a couple of questions about that rivet line.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Latimer" <ljm10587(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing rivet line |
Bill,
I just looked at the CAD drawings and they call out for "A5 P35 between rib
and spar intersection." This isn't the first time that the CAD and non-CAD
drawings disagree.
The measurements that I took on my actual center wing are closer to P35 than
P40.
Jerry Latimer
CH601HDS
> Help, guys. I'm working on the bottom skin of the center wing of my
601HD.
> The center-right drawing on 6-V-11 says that the rivet line at the front
of
> the bottom skin is A5 pitch 20, but not through the bottom L-shaped
> spar extrusion. I have a couple of questions about that rivet line.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Alberti" <daberti(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing rivet line |
Bill,
I placed a rivet at the intersection of the rib and the spar and split the
difference in the spacing to even out the pattern. With the lower nose skin
overlapping to the aft edge of the spar the 10mm edge spacing will place
your rivet line in the middle of the spar extrusion. The only place to not
put rivets yet is the 100mm area on the centerline of the aircraft...other
parts to follow in that area. I can send a digital photo of what my center
section looks like.
Dave
working on fuselage aft top skins.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 8:34 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 601HD center wing rivet line
>
> Help, guys. I'm working on the bottom skin of the center wing of my
601HD.
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing rivet line |
| From: | Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net> |
on 1/7/01 3:41 PM, Dave Alberti at daberti(at)execpc.com wrote:
>
> Bill,
> I placed a rivet at the intersection of the rib and the spar and split the
> difference in the spacing to even out the pattern. With the lower nose skin
> overlapping to the aft edge of the spar the 10mm edge spacing will place
> your rivet line in the middle of the spar extrusion.
Bill,
Likewise here - I checked out my aircraft and I have a single line of A5s
(about 35 pitch or so) along the lower spar extrusion that picks up the rear
and forward overlapping skins.
I think that the pitch 20 intersection with the skins that you refer to is
meant to indicate the end rivet in the gear box underside extrusion.
Grant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <rich(at)carol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
How will you connect the aluminum fuel line to a fuel tank that moves &
slightly vibrates?
I though about using alum too but didn't know how to go about it.
Rich
801
ulf3(at)juno.com wrote:
>
>
> Dave,
>
... Also, my EAA technical counselor thought that I should use aluminum
> tubing for the fuel lines inside
> the wings vs. the rubber hose supplied by ZAC (mainly for durability /
> maintenance reasons.)
> This is more work but should pay off in the long run.
>
> Good Luck
>
> Ulrich LaFosse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
I put a 270 degree loop about 5 inches in diameter to absorbe any movement,
then bulkhead flare fittings where it went through things and adel clamps
where it didn't. I've used the rubber tube in aluminized heat shield under
the cowel. got all the parts from AS&S. Boost pump is behind the seat and
two lines run to the firewall.
Richard
> How will you connect the aluminum fuel line to a fuel tank that moves &
> slightly vibrates?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Melanie @ Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Hi Rich,
I used a few inches of rubber fuel line from the tank to the aluminum fuel
line.
Thilo Kind
----- Original Message -----
From: Rich <rich(at)carol.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned
>
> How will you connect the aluminum fuel line to a fuel tank that moves &
> slightly vibrates?
> I though about using alum too but didn't know how to go about it.
>
> Rich
> 801
>
> ulf3(at)juno.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> ... Also, my EAA technical counselor thought that I should use aluminum
> > tubing for the fuel lines inside
> > the wings vs. the rubber hose supplied by ZAC (mainly for durability /
> > maintenance reasons.)
> > This is more work but should pay off in the long run.
> >
> > Good Luck
> >
> > Ulrich LaFosse
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leo Gates <leogates(at)thealamo.net> |
Hi y'all:
Not there yet -- just thinking ahead.
For those who have "been there, done that". What did you use for a
dummy passenger weight for test flight purposes?
Leo Gates
CH601HDS
N601Z (changed from N301LG)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Royer, Michel" <RoyerM(at)tc.gc.ca> |
Salt bag for my water conditionner
Michel Royer
Office (613)998-7812
Mailto:Royerm(at)tc.gc.ca
> ----------
> From: Leo Gates[SMTP:leogates(at)thealamo.net]
> Reply To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 10:35 AM
> To: Zenith List
> Subject: Zenith-List: Dummy Weight
>
>
> Hi y'all:
> Not there yet -- just thinking ahead.
> For those who have "been there, done that". What did you use for a
> dummy passenger weight for test flight purposes?
>
> Leo Gates
> CH601HDS
> N601Z (changed from N301LG)
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bruce Bockius <elrond(at)xprt.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dummy Weight |
Concrete premix bags. Available in 60 and 80 lb bags, $2-3. I did put
them in a plastic trash bag to make sure there wasn't any dust leakage.
-Bruce/601HD/TDO/Stratus/210 hrs
********************
Bruce Bockius
Black Forest, CO, USA
elrond(at)xprt.net
http://www.xprt.net/~elrond
Leo Gates wrote:
>
> Hi y'all:
> Not there yet -- just thinking ahead.
> For those who have "been there, done that". What did you use for a
> dummy passenger weight for test flight purposes?
>
> Leo Gates
> CH601HDS
> N601Z (changed from N301LG)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dummy Weight |
At 10:35 AM 08-01-2001 , you wrote:
>For those who have "been there, done that". What did you use for a
>dummy passenger weight for test flight purposes?
Other than flying with 2 people, rules or no rules, my choice for dense and
inexpensive weight was 60+ lb bags of gravel in the seat buckets in place
of cushions. I think I had gravel of a uniformly large size which would let
out less dust than unsifted gravel, in case of holes in the bag.
For the turtledeck and wing lockers, I could have rebagged smaller portions
of the gravel, but instead took whatever was lying about -- textbooks, jugs
of car oil or windshield washer fluid. Not ideal, but reasonable as long
the stuff behind one's head is well strapped down.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KevinDiehl(at)KevinDiehl.com |
| Subject: | USA SPORT PILOT CERTIFICATE and STOL 801 |
Does this Mean that a STOL 801 Modified to be a 2 seater may not need a
pilots license?
See Below Proposed Weight Limit is 1232 or less. 801 (depending on Engine)
should be 1150 LBS.
The Proposed maximum stall speed is 44 or less to qualify, Our plane Specs
"STALL SPEED (Flaps Down) 35 MPH" "STALL SPEED (Flaps Up) 43 MPH"
But they do propose that is be a 2 passenger, So can one declare the back
seat a Baggage area and put a Placard over the rear seat "Baggage area
only", or what is the minimum can be done to make the 801 a legal 2 seater?
801 planes Specs at http://www.zenithair.com/stolch801/performance.html
Read the Details Below.
FAA TO PROPOSE SPORT PILOT CERTIFICATE NPRM...
Within the next year, some aviators could be able to take off into the
wild blue yonder with nothing more than a steed to fly, some basic
training, and a valid U.S. driver's license (flattering photo preferred)
as their medical ticket. EAA and several ultralight organizations have
been working with the feds to institute a Sport Pilot certificate --
which would require written and practical tests, but no medical exam --
and it is close to becoming a reality. Such a category, filling the gap
between unlicensed ultralight flyers and recreational or private pilots,
would allow a pilot to fly and carry a passenger in VFR daytime
conditions in unpowered or light single-engine two-place aircraft that
don't quite fit into FAR Part 103.
...DETAILS ARE STILL IN FLUX...
The FAA is still working on details, so all of this is subject to
change, but here's what will likely happen. A subcategory to FAR Part
21 will allow "light" aircraft -- under 1,232 pounds and with a stall
speed of 44 mph or less -- that exceed the limits of FAR Part 103 to be
certified as experimental "light" aircraft that can be operated by sport
pilots. A new category under FAR Part 21 would allow the "light"
aircraft to be sold as ready-to-fly by manufacturers.
...BUT THE GOAL IS FLEXIBILITY
EAA's goal is a flexible pilot certificate that would allow current
ultralight pilots and future sport pilots to fly and carry a passenger
without the need for a third-class medical and what EAA calls
"financially burdensome, unnecessary training requirements." EAA is
expecting that the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) will be
published by early April, and is asking the ultralight community (where
rumors about the NPRM are rampant) to wait until they see the rule
before commenting on it. Once the NPRM is published, interested parties
will have 90 days to speak their piece, and by late 2001, there should
be a sport pilot rule on the books.
NOTE: For additional details on how the Sport Pilot certificate will
work, go to AVweb's NewsWire <http://avweb.com/n/?02a>. (Scroll down a
Few Articles to see it.
Kevin Diehl
http://www.KevinDiehl.com
STOL 801 Full Kit Rudder Built in May 2000 Rudder Class.
Hope to start the Rest of the Kit soon (Need to get Zinc-Chromate)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MSandidg(at)peabodygroup.com (Mark Sandidge) |
Date: January 8,2000
From: Mark Sandidge (msandidg(at)peabodygroup.com)
Subject: Stall Speed
Hi All,
Was reading the latest post from AVWEB and noticed the proposed rule
making regarding some type sport license where no third class medical
is required. The plane can not exceed 1232 lb with a stall of not more
than 44 mph. Also limited to two passengers.
I was wondering if any of you thought the 601HDS could meet these
requirements with flaps. I noticed the Czech web site shows some that
will reduce stall to 65 kilometers (40mph).
I was thinking if I ever have trouble in the future with my third
class medical it would be much easier to add flaps now while building.
Any thoughts/comments?
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: USA SPORT PILOT CERTIFICATE and STOL 801 |
Its not really clear if there talking about empty weight or gross weight but
I suspect they mean gross which will eliminate the 801.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Slaughter <mslaughter(at)interhop.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dummy Weight |
Kitty Litter..3X20 kilo bags cheap and keeps the kitties happy after.
At 10:35 AM 1/8/01, you wrote:
>
>Hi y'all:
>Not there yet -- just thinking ahead.
>For those who have "been there, done that". What did you use for a
>dummy passenger weight for test flight purposes?
>
>Leo Gates
>CH601HDS
>N601Z (changed from N301LG)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS" <aircraft(at)CZAW.CZ> |
| Subject: | USA SPORT PILOT CERTIFICATE and STOL 801 |
No, gross weight of about 1200, not empty. But the 601 and 701 will be and
we are getting ready!
Cheers,
CWE
CHIP W. ERWIN
CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS, S.R.O
Lucni 1824
686 06 Stare Mesto
Czech Republic
Tel: 420 632 543 456 Mobile: 420 602 342 717
Fax: 420 632 543 692 USA Fax: 561 264 0936
E-mail: aircraft(at)czaw.cz Web address: www.czaw.cz
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
KevinDiehl(at)KevinDiehl.com
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:02 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: USA SPORT PILOT CERTIFICATE and STOL 801
Does this Mean that a STOL 801 Modified to be a 2 seater may not need a
pilots license?
See Below Proposed Weight Limit is 1232 or less. 801 (depending on Engine)
should be 1150 LBS.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Fothergill <mfothergill(at)sympatico.ca> |
Hi Mark;
I very much doubt that the HDS stall speed with flaps? will get that
low. How would you install flaps on the HDS? The XL might do it.
This new spec is very close to Canadian UL rules.
Regards
Mike
UHS Spinners
601 HDS
Mark Sandidge wrote:
>
>
> Date: January 8,2000
>
> From: Mark Sandidge (msandidg(at)peabodygroup.com)
>
> Subject: Stall Speed
>
> Hi All,
>
> Was reading the latest post from AVWEB and noticed the proposed rule
> making regarding some type sport license where no third class medical
> is required. The plane can not exceed 1232 lb with a stall of not more
> than 44 mph. Also limited to two passengers.
>
> I was wondering if any of you thought the 601HDS could meet these
> requirements with flaps. I noticed the Czech web site shows some that
> will reduce stall to 65 kilometers (40mph).
>
> I was thinking if I ever have trouble in the future with my third
> class medical it would be much easier to add flaps now while building.
>
> Any thoughts/comments?
>
> Mark
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Off topic? Or the ultimate topic? |
| From: | Glen.Worstell(at)seagate.com |
01/08/2001 10:59:02 AM
> It means that all you have to do is hit the delete key and then you don't
have to read the messages that the rest of us seem to appreciate and enjoy.
Please remember that some of us read the digest instead of getting
individual messages. For us it
is a bit more work to avoid the occasional long, off-topic messages, or the
entire text of previous long messages 5 levels deep.
Like everyone else I enjoy the occasional off-topic messages that are short
and interesting, such as
the recent composite photo of the earth at night. But please let's all try
to keep most of the messages
on topic, less the signal-to-noise ratio degrade to uselessness as it has
on many other lists.
If you wish to reply to this post, please do not reply to the list. Just
send your comments to me.
g.
601HD Trike, Rotax 912UL, Ivoprop in-flight adjustable, IFR, dual
electrical system, lots of fun, cheap flying.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS" <aircraft(at)CZAW.CZ> |
We do not make flaps for the HDS, only the HD and UL. I don't know if you
could meet the stall specs with the HDS without big and/or complex flaps.
Best to keep it as it is.
CWE
CHIP W. ERWIN
CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS, S.R.O
Lucni 1824
686 06 Stare Mesto
Czech Republic
Tel: 420 632 543 456 Mobile: 420 602 342 717
Fax: 420 632 543 692 USA Fax: 561 264 0936
E-mail: aircraft(at)czaw.cz Web address: www.czaw.cz
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mark Sandidge
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 6:58 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
Date: January 8,2000
From: Mark Sandidge (msandidg(at)peabodygroup.com)
Subject: Stall Speed
Hi All,
Was reading the latest post from AVWEB and noticed the proposed rule
making regarding some type sport license where no third class medical
is required. The plane can not exceed 1232 lb with a stall of not more
than 44 mph. Also limited to two passengers.
I was wondering if any of you thought the 601HDS could meet these
requirements with flaps. I noticed the Czech web site shows some that
will reduce stall to 65 kilometers (40mph).
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dummy Weight |
Leo
I am in the process of using 25 pound shot bags. They are small
and easy to handle. I went to the local gun club and offered to
rent them, but they loaned me eight bags and just told me to
return them when I was finished. They would not take any money for
the loan of these bags but several members took me up on my offer
to give them a ride when I completed my tests.
Ken Lennox N99KL
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| From: | Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net> |
Matronics Zenith list
Sorry all!
I'd honestly meant to send that last remark about Glen's comment, directly
to Glen. But the fingers got ahead of the brain.... dangerous in aircraft -
merely annoying with computers....
Grant
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
| From: | ulf3(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Rich,
I used oversized grommets through the ribs to pass the aluminum fuel
lines. My tanks are fitted snugly
between the ribs and supporting L's with cork so that they really will no
move much (vibrate yes, but not shift).
I expect the largest movements to result from flexing of the wings and
hence rotation at the junction of the wing
roots and the cabin. However, due to the "stout" struts, hefty wing
spars, and short wing span the magnitude of the
wing flexing and torsion should not be very much.
I also plan on using oversized grommets and Ell AN fittings inside the
cabin adjacent to the door header
(called door sill P/N 8F19-5 by ZAC) with sufficient "give" as the lines
go aft then down to the seat
support panel, then forward to fuel shutoff valves, gacolator, fuel boost
pump etc. I am still working out the details.
I also used 3/8-inch dia. Versatube (A/C Spruce P/N 3003-0) which is soft
and has some "give".
Ulrich
801
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing rivet line |
Grant,
Just to be safe, I asked Nick today about the rivet line. I specifically
asked him "Are there two rivet lines for the nose skin and bottom skins,
one spaced at 20 mm and another at 40 mm spacing through the bottom
spar extrusion?" His answer was "Right middle diagram. Two rivet lines,
one through the center of the Spar extrusion, the second rivet line is 10mm
back from the front edge of the Center Wing Bottom Skin 6V11-2, A5
pitch 20."
Your note sounds as if you only have one of those rivet lines, or did I
misread it?
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Grant Corriveau" <gfcorriv(at)total.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 601HD center wing rivet line
>
> on 1/7/01 3:41 PM, Dave Alberti at daberti(at)execpc.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Bill,
> > I placed a rivet at the intersection of the rib and the spar and split
the
> > difference in the spacing to even out the pattern. With the lower nose
skin
> > overlapping to the aft edge of the spar the 10mm edge spacing will place
> > your rivet line in the middle of the spar extrusion.
>
> Bill,
>
> Likewise here - I checked out my aircraft and I have a single line of A5s
> (about 35 pitch or so) along the lower spar extrusion that picks up the
rear
> and forward overlapping skins.
>
> I think that the pitch 20 intersection with the skins that you refer to is
> meant to indicate the end rivet in the gear box underside extrusion.
>
> Grant
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Re: Off topic? Or the ultimate topic? |
| From: | Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net> |
on 1/8/01 11:52 AM, Glen.Worstell(at)seagate.com at Glen.Worstell(at)seagate.com
wrote:
...
> If you wish to reply to this post, please do not reply to the list. Just
> send your comments to me.
>
> g.
> 601HD Trike, Rotax 912UL, Ivoprop in-flight adjustable, IFR, dual
> electrical system, lots of fun, cheap flying.
Glen,
That's an excellent point. As I use the 'real time' list format, I hadn't
seen it from the angle.
Thanks again for posting that -- I've learned something.
Grant
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing rivet line |
| From: | Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net> |
on 1/8/01 7:20 PM, Bill Steer at bsteer(at)gwi.net wrote:
>
> Grant,
>
> Just to be safe, I asked Nick today about the rivet line. I specifically
> asked him "Are there two rivet lines for the nose skin and bottom skins,
> one spaced at 20 mm and another at 40 mm spacing through the bottom
> spar extrusion?" His answer was "Right middle diagram. Two rivet lines,
> one through the center of the Spar extrusion, the second rivet line is 10mm
> back from the front edge of the Center Wing Bottom Skin 6V11-2, A5
> pitch 20."
>
> Your note sounds as if you only have one of those rivet lines, or did I
> misread it?
>
> Bill
Bill,
Thanks for passing that along! I'll certainly correct that now, before I
fall out the bottom floor of the cockpit during a dive pull-out!!
Grant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Melanie @ Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Hi Ulrich,
I have the 601 HDS. Fuel hoses are running from the wing tanks to the fuel
pumps mounted in the outer center wing bay. Everything is easily accessable
after removing the wing cover strip (2 bolts).
Thilo Kind
----- Original Message -----
From: <ulf3(at)juno.com>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 8:05 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned
>
> fuel line.
>
> Hi Thilo,
>
> Using any rubber inside the wings defeats the purpose of what I am trying
> to achieve
> (durability, specially in hard to reach places). Did you provide access
> panels to allow you
> to inspect/replace the rubber in a few years?
>
>
> Ulrich
> 801
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <rich(at)carol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Ulrich,
I bought the 3/8" versatube also a while back. What I can't find is
the E11 AN fittings. What page is it on? Is that E one one or ELL ???
Are you getting the steel or alum?
At Sun n Fun I noticed that the demo 801 had a fitting at the wing root
just inside the cabin. They used rubber hose inside the cabin. They
probably used this in the wing also. I want to use alum tubing & I think
I'll also use a fitting at the wing root... in case I ever need to
remove the wing to do some work.
I would like to cut a 6" hole in the bottom of the root skin ahead of
the spar. I have my wiring thru the spar at the root then going thru the
nose ribs where I have a thin walled PVC tubing which goes to the wing
tip.
Does it weaken the wing to cut inspection holes or affect wing
performance depending on location on the wing?
Thanks
Rich
ulf3(at)juno.com wrote:
>
>
> Rich,
>
> I used oversized grommets through the ribs to pass the aluminum fuel
> lines. My tanks are fitted snugly
> between the ribs and supporting L's with cork so that they really will no
> move much (vibrate yes, but not shift).
> I expect the largest movements to result from flexing of the wings and
> hence rotation at the junction of the wing
> roots and the cabin. However, due to the "stout" struts, hefty wing
> spars, and short wing span the magnitude of the
> wing flexing and torsion should not be very much.
>
> I also plan on using oversized grommets and Ell AN fittings inside the
> cabin adjacent to the door header
> (called door sill P/N 8F19-5 by ZAC) with sufficient "give" as the lines
> go aft then down to the seat
> support panel, then forward to fuel shutoff valves, gacolator, fuel boost
> pump etc. I am still working out the details.
>
> I also used 3/8-inch dia. Versatube (A/C Spruce P/N 3003-0) which is soft
> and has some "give".
>
> Ulrich
> 801
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <rich(at)carol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Has anyone thought about or tried mounting the electric fuel pumps in
the wing root? Would it be any quieter or help with the cooler temps up
there? Or would it be more dangerous because there would be high
pressure fuel lines running thru the cabin (fuel injection setup).
Rich
801
"Melanie @ Thilo Kind" wrote:
>
>
> Hi Ulrich,
>
> I have the 601 HDS. Fuel hoses are running from the wing tanks to the fuel
> pumps mounted in the outer center wing bay. Everything is easily accessable
> after removing the wing cover strip (2 bolts).
>
> Thilo Kind
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <ulf3(at)juno.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 8:05 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned
>
> >
> > > fuel line.
> >
> > Hi Thilo,
> >
> > Using any rubber inside the wings defeats the purpose of what I am trying
> > to achieve
> > (durability, specially in hard to reach places). Did you provide access
> > panels to allow you
> > to inspect/replace the rubber in a few years?
> >
> >
> > Ulrich
> > 801
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leo Gates <leogates(at)thealamo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dummy Weight |
Thanks to all for the excellent suggestions for flight test dummy weights.
Tom, my 17 year old cat, who has weak kidneys, endorses Mike Slaughter's
suggestion of Kitty Litter.
Leo Gates
CH601HDS (Building)
N601Z
Mike Slaughter wrote:
>
> Kitty Litter..3X20 kilo bags cheap and keeps the kitties happy after.
> At 10:35 AM 1/8/01, you wrote:
> >
> >Hi y'all:
> >Not there yet -- just thinking ahead.
> >For those who have "been there, done that". What did you use for a
> >dummy passenger weight for test flight purposes?
> >
> >Leo Gates
> >CH601HDS
> >N601Z (changed from N301LG)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
I know this, my fuel pump, mounted to aluminum just behind the seat, is way
to noisy.
Electrical system working, fuel pump has got to be insulated from the
airframe.
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: Rich <rich(at)carol.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 6:37 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned
>
> Has anyone thought about or tried mounting the electric fuel pumps in
> the wing root? Would it be any quieter or help with the cooler temps up
> there? Or would it be more dangerous because there would be high
> pressure fuel lines running thru the cabin (fuel injection setup).
>
> Rich
> 801
>
>
> "Melanie @ Thilo Kind" wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi Ulrich,
> >
> > I have the 601 HDS. Fuel hoses are running from the wing tanks to the
fuel
> > pumps mounted in the outer center wing bay. Everything is easily
accessable
> > after removing the wing cover strip (2 bolts).
> >
> > Thilo Kind
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <ulf3(at)juno.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 8:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned
> >
> > >
> > > > > fuel line.
> > >
> > > Hi Thilo,
> > >
> > > Using any rubber inside the wings defeats the purpose of what I am
trying
> > > to achieve
> > > (durability, specially in hard to reach places). Did you provide
access
> > > panels to allow you
> > > to inspect/replace the rubber in a few years?
> > >
> > >
> > > Ulrich
> > > 801
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
In a high pressure system does the length and rigidity of the tubing forward
of the pump have an effect on the pressure delivered to the source?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Hi Rich, my thoughts on the ZAC supplied fuel line.
Rigid AL would be preferable. The flexible line that ZAC supplies will, and
has, worked very well in past applications. When using "rubber line" I think
a builder would make sure to have all fittings and lines accessable to
inspection and maintenence every annual.Also this would be true of hard line
if installed.I think the key here is to make sure ALL critical systems are
readily accessable and are easy to inspect. If this means drilling out 80 or
90 rivets to replace or inspect a component than so be it. Inspection holes
can be placed where you need them AND where ZAC will approve them. If a
critical component is not in a place where an inspection hole can easily be
cut than a panel or skin will have to be removed at every annual
Good year to come, 2001
.Jim Ingram
Yamhill, Oregon
CH801 mazda 13B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Wood <mawood(at)zoo.uvm.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
>
>In a high pressure system does the length and rigidity of the tubing forward
>of the pump have an effect on the pressure delivered to the source?
Yes
The pressure loss is dependent on a number of things which include: length,
fluid flow rate, diameter of tubing, viscosity of liquid, and surface
condition. I would think rigidity would be a very minor factor. With the
flow rate involved and the fact that a very small penalty in weight or cost
would be incurred to go to a larger diameter tube, I would say that most
systems you see will be over engineered and not come near having a problem.
________________________________________________________________________________
Droop the ailerons.
Also, is the 44 mph at full gross weight? I imagine that it is. You could
also reduce your upper gross weight limit to work toward the required stall
speed. You might end up with a solo only airplane, but what the heck, you'd
still be flying. You could also build a new set of HD wings to replace the
HDS. Just ideas.
Jim Weston
McDonough, Ga.
-----Original Message-----
From: MSandidg(at)peabodygroup.com [mailto:MSandidg(at)peabodygroup.com]
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 12:58 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
Date: January 8,2000
From: Mark Sandidge (msandidg(at)peabodygroup.com)
Subject: Stall Speed
Hi All,
Was reading the latest post from AVWEB and noticed the proposed rule
making regarding some type sport license where no third class medical
is required. The plane can not exceed 1232 lb with a stall of not more
than 44 mph. Also limited to two passengers.
I was wondering if any of you thought the 601HDS could meet these
requirements with flaps. I noticed the Czech web site shows some that
will reduce stall to 65 kilometers (40mph).
I was thinking if I ever have trouble in the future with my third
class medical it would be much easier to add flaps now while building.
Any thoughts/comments?
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Jim:
| Date: | Jan 10, 2001 |
| Subject: | Re: 801 Wing Manual Lessons Learned |
Rich
| From: | "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au> |
----- Original Message -----
From: Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> Does the 701 incorporate 'flaperons' that droop the ailerons to achieve a
> 'flap' effect?
I believe the 701 has conventional, multi stage flaps. Plus fixed leading
edge
slats.
Perry Morrison
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Raker <phadr2(at)yahoo.com> |
On the contrary, Grant is correct. The 701 & 801
utilize "Junker" type flaperons, per the Zenith web
site and literature. These drooping ailerons are
mounted below the trailing edge of the wing. They're
draggy but do produce impressive lift coefficients.
P.H.Raker-HDS/Stratus, on wheels, but too cold to work
(unheated shop in NW MN, below 0F)
--- "Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
> Morrison"
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 9:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
>
> > Does the 701 incorporate 'flaperons' that droop
> the ailerons to achieve a
> > 'flap' effect?
>
> I believe the 701 has conventional, multi stage
> flaps. Plus fixed leading
> edge
> slats.
>
> Perry Morrison
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au> |
Apologies,
I flew in a 701 some time back and recalled a big flap lever that was
used to set flap, but was obviously setting the amount of aileron
droop rather than a fixed flap.
----- Original Message -----
From: Phil Raker <phadr2(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
> On the contrary, Grant is correct. The 701 & 801
> utilize "Junker" type flaperons, per the Zenith web
> site and literature. These drooping ailerons are
> mounted below the trailing edge of the wing. They're
> draggy but do produce impressive lift coefficients.
>
> P.H.Raker-HDS/Stratus, on wheels, but too cold to work
> (unheated shop in NW MN, below 0F)
>
> --- "Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
> > Morrison"
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 9:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> >
> >
> > > Does the 701 incorporate 'flaperons' that droop
> > the ailerons to achieve a
> > > 'flap' effect?
> >
> > I believe the 701 has conventional, multi stage
> > flaps. Plus fixed leading
> > edge
> > slats.
> >
> > Perry Morrison
> >
> >
> >
> > through
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> > Matronics!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dick Baner <db8(at)mtco.com> |
No the 701 has fixed leading edge slats but a mixing box that functions to droop
the ailerons which are full span. In practice most 701 pilots do not find that
the flaps receive extensive use and unless really necessary for the landing do
not use them.; Dick Baner
"Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 9:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
> > Does the 701 incorporate 'flaperons' that droop the ailerons to achieve a
> > 'flap' effect?
>
> I believe the 701 has conventional, multi stage flaps. Plus fixed leading
> edge
> slats.
>
> Perry Morrison
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Hogan" <shogan(at)alumni.washington.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Wankel Power |
Has anyone seen or considered using a Mazda rotary engine in a 601?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Wood <mawood(at)zoo.uvm.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Wankel Power |
>
>
>Has anyone seen or considered using a Mazda rotary engine in a 601?
>
From what I have seen, they would be too heavy.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <dlleedom(at)collins.rockwell.com> |
5.0.3 (Intl)|21 March 2000) at 01/11/2001 12:43:43 PM
I would be interested to see how this affects the plane (especially the
HDS). From what I understand (I am currently researching the plane and I
haven't gotten a chance to see one up close yet) these things have a pretty
fat wing and already drop like a rock. I wonder how much more effective
camber (and higher c(l) you will get with flaps). You may need to drop
them like a fowler flap to give you more surface area, other wise you may
just be spoiling the lift and increasing drag. That would seem to give a
steeper approach but not a slower stall speed (maybe even a higher one?).
I thought I'd seen a web site a while ago where a builder was adding them
but he was still building. Does anyone have a flying 601 with flaps? I am
also curious about longitudinal stability with the essentially different
wing. Plain flaps move the center of pressure on the wing which can move
your cg limits. I am not an aerodynamicist and I am definitely not
qualified to do the analysis myself, but it is a mod I had thought about.
If it can be done without too much trouble, I would think that ZAC would be
interested enough to do the math and figure it out. Any business wants
more markets.
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Luce <robluce1(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wankel Power |
It'd be kinda high on the horsepower scale for a 601,
maybe with a XL. Considering they are getting an
average of 160-180HP out of a standard 13B and close
to 300lbs fully installed w/prop, I'm not sure well
it'd work in a 601. With light porting and some basic
modifications the HP out of a 13B exceeds 200 HP.
http://powersportaviation.com
Someone just completed a Murphy Rebel (pretty sure)
with a 13B installation that "looks like a big block
Ford in a Pinto engine compartment". Subscribe to
Paul Lamar's Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter. The
Internet mail list for Aircraft rotary engines is
Plugs Up. See http://www.members.home.net/flyrotary/
Probably, one of the more famous (or infamous)
installations of a 13B in a plane is Yvon Cournoyer's
Zenith CH200. The plane was finished in 1990, and has
been through several engines at this point.
Apparently, he's proven the strength of the CH200
design, and the ability of the 13B to run without oil
(though at a drastically reduced TBO).
Most Zenith designs are too small for a 13B/20B
installation. The only one that might be a realistic
candidate is the 801, but it would more likely be a
candidate for the 20B which isn't as common of an
engine as the 13B.
Amateur Wankel gearhead wannabe.
RL
--- Scott Hogan wrote:
>
>
> Has anyone seen or considered using a Mazda rotary
> engine in a 601?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| From: | Grant Corriveau <gfcorriv(at)total.net> |
on 1/11/01 4:47 PM, Weston, Jim at Jim.Weston@delta-air.com wrote:
>
> O.K., my comment about drooping the ailerons caused some pretty good
> discussion. Here is another one to think about. How about vortex
> generators on top of the wings. They are low drag in cruise flight and help
> to break up the boundary layer just before the flow separation during stall.
> Keeping the airflow closer to the wings surface. This lowers the stall
> speed and tends to gentle the stall.
>
> Jim
Jim,
I was thinking of experimenting one day in the future, with these on the
rear of the canopy to see what it might do for cruise speed.
Somone (Peter Chapman?) recently posted some photos of 'tuft tests' he has
conducted on the wings and canopy. Those should help determine where the
flow separates, and where a vortex generator might help.
Grant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Tanner" <vk3auu(at)sympac.com.au> |
As an addendum to what Dick had to say.
If you have to get into a really short strip, then you will use the
flaperons but there is one caution I would add. The use of even half flap
produces a forward pitching moment which improves downward visibility
somewhat, at the same time it increases the downward force needed by the
elevator to effect the flair. If the Centre of Gravity is in the forward
half and full flap is used, you will run out of back stick unless you carry
some power into the flair, which tends to negate the short field landing
objective. Also because of the extra drag, rate of descent will also be
quite high if power is low.
So beware of just drooping the ailerons to reduce your stall speed, you may
find that a larger elevator is also necessary.
David
________________________________________________________________________________
Jim
I just finished helping to install vortex generators on a Cherokee
140, and the owner claims it lowered his stall speed 5 mph. They
are placed on the top of the wing in area of the prop wash where
the air separates from the wing (boundary layer separation I think
they call it).
I plan to "tuff" my wings and see where the air actually breaks
loose during the stall, I plan to photograph the actual separation
and show it to some NASA engineers. We have a lot of them at here
at the field I fly out of and they are currently working on VG's
for the long-ezy and several other "plastic" airplanes.
Ken Lennox 601HDS TD N99KL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "fhulen" <fhulen(at)gabs.net> |
| Subject: | Vortex generators |
> I just finished helping to install vortex generators on a Cherokee
> 140, and the owner claims it lowered his stall speed 5 mph.
> Ken Lennox
++ Ken, I've seen some of those devices and always wondered if they also add
drag which would reduce top end and cruise numbers. Did he say anything
about that? If he didn't, it would be a valuable thing to ask him about.
Thanks.
Fred
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au> |
----- Original Message -----
From: David Tanner <vk3auu(at)sympac.com.au>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 7:15 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> So beware of just drooping the ailerons to reduce your stall speed, you
may
> find that a larger elevator is also necessary.
>
> David
An excellent point, does drooping the flaps also limit roll authority in
gusty
conditions because of more limited range of control surface movement?
Perry Morrison
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au> |
----- Original Message -----
From: <kjl33u(at)ezy.net>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> > I plan to "tuff" my wings and see where the air actually breaks
> loose during the stall, I plan to photograph the actual separation
> and show it to some NASA engineers. We have a lot of them at here
> at the field I fly out of and they are currently working on VG's
> for the long-ezy and several other "plastic" airplanes.
>
> Ken Lennox 601HDS TD N99KL
I thought the long ez challenges of VGs were worked out long ago
and are commercially available as a fix to the loss of lift the canard
experiences in rain. Wonder what they're working on?
Perry Morrison
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Schemmel, Grant" <Schemmel(at)utmc.aeroflex.com> |
discussion. Here is another one to think about. How about vortex
generators on top of the wings. They are low drag in cruise flight and help
to break up the boundary layer just before the flow separation during stall.
Keeping the airflow closer to the wings surface. This lowers the stall
speed and tends to gentle the stall.
Jim
*** This is something I've been wondering about for awhile too. I haven't seen
anything though, that describes the process by which one goes about choosing
the VG and determining where to put it. Anybody had experience with these, or
maybe asked Chris H. as to whether they might help?
Grant Schemmel
601HDS (overhauling o-200)
Penrose, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Tarabocchia" <zodiac.builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Someone kick me, I think I'm having a nightmare..... |
Today , after six months of waiting, a DAR that the FAA lists in my area,and
I had a meeting. This meeting was to discuss an appropriate airport in my
area to test from. Also we would go over the paper work I would need. Then
we spent about an hour of question asking. He admitted to me that he has
never handled a experimental sport plane. Which at first didn't bother me.
I still thought he should be qualified, or the FAA would not Designate him.
As the meeting went on I began to realize that he had very little or no
knowledge of this type of construction at all. He then told me his primary
business is working with large planes like 747's, Airbuses, and the sort.
O.K. I think this shouldn't be a problem, I couldn't care either way what
he knows. As long as this process is done and goes smooth.
Then we hap hardedly get into the subject of his fee. He tells me that his
fee will be $2500.00. I start to laugh because I think he is lightening the
mood with a joke. He turns to me, with a stone cold face, and says , " I'm
serious...."
My first thought was to ask him, "Are you F........ing crazy?" But I stood
back for a second and tried to compose my thoughts. I noted to him that his
price was a bit high compared to what I have heard other DAR's are getting.
His response was, "The only reason I even decided to take this project on
was because he thought it would be interesting." Going on to tell me that
with amount of time and effort he would be spending on this project (4 to 5
days) he was giving me a good deal. He said, that when I crash and destroy
someone's property, It would be his ass on the line.
Well I turn to my good friend that sat in on the meeting, and asked if he
would pinch me. So that I could wake up and start this nightmare from the
begging. I never thought to ask him over the phone six months ago what his
fee would be. I thought from reading post on the list and articles in the
magazines that the rate would be $300.00 to $600.00.
He told me to take a couple of days to decide. Well Before he could go any
further I told him I would not be needing his services.
I ask the list this, Am I that out of touch with reality, or did this guy
think I was a live one?
Now I scrambling to find a DAR at the 11th hour. Any ideas?
John W. Tarabocchia
601hds N6042T Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
Airframe 100% Complete...
Installing Wire and Engine...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
Hi Perry,
you mentioned something about canard and rain. Do you have any specifis on
that?
Thanks
Thilo Kind
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dr. Perry
> Morrison
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 8:08 PM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <kjl33u(at)ezy.net>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
>
> > > I plan to "tuff" my wings and see where the air actually breaks
> > loose during the stall, I plan to photograph the actual separation
> > and show it to some NASA engineers. We have a lot of them at here
> > at the field I fly out of and they are currently working on VG's
> > for the long-ezy and several other "plastic" airplanes.
> >
> > Ken Lennox 601HDS TD N99KL
>
> I thought the long ez challenges of VGs were worked out long ago
> and are commercially available as a fix to the loss of lift the canard
> experiences in rain. Wonder what they're working on?
>
> Perry Morrison
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
I see another issue with flaperons on the CH 601: the hingeless ailerons
don't allow for that much downward deflection. One needs to install
hinges...
Also, I don't see the need for flaps on the CH 601 HDS: cut the power and
that baby sinks like a rock. If one needs a low stall speed airplane, the
601 HD or 701 should be a better choice.
Thilo Kind
flying the CH 601 HDS and having fun...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dr. Perry
> Morrison
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 7:57 PM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David Tanner <vk3auu(at)sympac.com.au>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 7:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
>
>
>
> > So beware of just drooping the ailerons to reduce your
> stall speed, you
> may
> > find that a larger elevator is also necessary.
> >
> > David
>
> An excellent point, does drooping the flaps also limit roll
> authority in
> gusty
> conditions because of more limited range of control surface movement?
>
> Perry Morrison
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "fhulen" <fhulen(at)gabs.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Vortex generators |
> Here's a website I ran across in the past re vortex generators, fwiw.....
>
> http://www.microaero.com
++ I found this interesting, and if you click on "what's new" you will find
that they are coming out with vortex generators for RV4 and RV6. I bet if
interest were shown, they would come up with some for the 601.
Fred
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
| Subject: | Someone kick me, I think I'm having a nightmare..... |
Hi John,
you must be kiddin.... My DAR asked for $ 350.00 plus travel costs, which I
thought was okay. The inspection took probably an hour. Plus, the DAR is
required to fill out some paperwork. No way, that a guy can ask for $
2,500.00. By the way: it's not his ass, that's on the line. You are the one,
that certifies, that the airplane is airworthy.
You basically have two options:
a) find another DAR - the local EAA chapters might be helpful here. Or ask
the local FAA office for names (although the less you talk to them, the
better...)
b) have the FAA inspect your plane. They are required to do that. There are
no fees involved, however, htey probably make it hard on you. Furthermore,
they have a lot of time - meaning, your inspection might be scheduled for
next year or so...
Good luck.
Thilo Kind
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John W.
> Tarabocchia
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 10:55 PM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: Someone kick me, I think I'm having a
> nightmare.....
>
>
>
>
> Today , after six months of waiting, a DAR that the FAA lists
> in my area,and
> I had a meeting. This meeting was to discuss an appropriate
> airport in my
> area to test from. Also we would go over the paper work I
> would need. Then
> we spent about an hour of question asking. He admitted to me
> that he has
> never handled a experimental sport plane. Which at first
> didn't bother me.
> I still thought he should be qualified, or the FAA would not
> Designate him.
> As the meeting went on I began to realize that he had very
> little or no
> knowledge of this type of construction at all. He then told
> me his primary
> business is working with large planes like 747's, Airbuses,
> and the sort.
> O.K. I think this shouldn't be a problem, I couldn't care
> either way what
> he knows. As long as this process is done and goes smooth.
>
> Then we hap hardedly get into the subject of his fee. He
> tells me that his
> fee will be $2500.00. I start to laugh because I think he is
> lightening the
> mood with a joke. He turns to me, with a stone cold face,
> and says , " I'm
> serious...."
>
> My first thought was to ask him, "Are you F........ing
> crazy?" But I stood
> back for a second and tried to compose my thoughts. I noted
> to him that his
> price was a bit high compared to what I have heard other
> DAR's are getting.
> His response was, "The only reason I even decided to take
> this project on
> was because he thought it would be interesting." Going on to
> tell me that
> with amount of time and effort he would be spending on this
> project (4 to 5
> days) he was giving me a good deal. He said, that when I
> crash and destroy
> someone's property, It would be his ass on the line.
>
> Well I turn to my good friend that sat in on the meeting, and
> asked if he
> would pinch me. So that I could wake up and start this
> nightmare from the
> begging. I never thought to ask him over the phone six
> months ago what his
> fee would be. I thought from reading post on the list and
> articles in the
> magazines that the rate would be $300.00 to $600.00.
>
> He told me to take a couple of days to decide. Well Before
> he could go any
> further I told him I would not be needing his services.
>
> I ask the list this, Am I that out of touch with reality, or
> did this guy
> think I was a live one?
>
> Now I scrambling to find a DAR at the 11th hour. Any ideas?
>
> John W. Tarabocchia
>
> 601hds N6042T Web Site:
http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
Airframe 100% Complete...
Installing Wire and Engine...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
| Subject: | Towbar for Zodiac CH 601 |
Hi folks,
as promised, I made a few photos of my new towbar, which I built for my CH
601 HDS. The pictures are available here:
http://home.sprynet.com/~m_tkind/towbar.htm. Please be patient, it might
take a few minutes to load the side.
If you have any question, feel free to drop me a line.
Thilo Kind m_tkind(at)sprynet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au> |
----- Original Message -----
From: Thilo Kind <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 2:01 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
> Hi Perry,
>
> you mentioned something about canard and rain. Do you have any specifis on
> that?
>
Thought it was pretty well known. The variezes and I think the Longs tend to
lose a
bit of lift in rain. Not serious but the solution was VGs. Canard aviator or
similar
site will have material on it.
Perry Morrison
> Thanks
>
> Thilo Kind
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dr. Perry
> > Morrison
> > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 8:08 PM
> > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <kjl33u(at)ezy.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:02 AM
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> >
> >
> > > > I plan to "tuff" my wings and see where the air actually breaks
> > > loose during the stall, I plan to photograph the actual separation
> > > and show it to some NASA engineers. We have a lot of them at here
> > > at the field I fly out of and they are currently working on VG's
> > > for the long-ezy and several other "plastic" airplanes.
> > >
> > > Ken Lennox 601HDS TD N99KL
> >
> > I thought the long ez challenges of VGs were worked out long ago
> > and are commercially available as a fix to the loss of lift the canard
> > experiences in rain. Wonder what they're working on?
> >
> > Perry Morrison
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Morelli" <billvt(at)together.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Someone kick me, I think I'm having a nightmare..... |
My DAR charged $500 (He charges $600 if you are not a national EAA member).
Took him 45 minutes. He had been my tech counselor prior to becoming a DAR
so he was already familiar with my building.
The DAR does not sign the aircraft off to be airworthy, you the builder
signs the aircraft off. The DAR just attests to the fact that you have met
all of the requirements for certification.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ualski <ualski(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | FS: Conti. O-200A |
List,
I'm changing my plans for the engine in my CH-701 and placing the O-200A I
currently have in the garage up for sale. For anyone interested or curious,
I've put the log book online at http://home.earthlink.net/~ualski/index.html
-- Aaron Sliwinski
ualski(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kilby, Roger" <Roger.Kilby(at)DynCorp.com> |
John,
What part of the country are you in?
Roger Kilby
N98RK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dick Baner <db8(at)mtco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Someone kick me, I think I'm having a nightmare..... |
The fees in central illinois are $300 plus mileage. Dick Baner
"John W. Tarabocchia" wrote:
>
> Today , after six months of waiting, a DAR that the FAA lists in my area,and
> I had a meeting. This meeting was to discuss an appropriate airport in my
> area to test from. Also we would go over the paper work I would need. Then
> we spent about an hour of question asking. He admitted to me that he has
> never handled a experimental sport plane. Which at first didn't bother me.
> I still thought he should be qualified, or the FAA would not Designate him.
> As the meeting went on I began to realize that he had very little or no
> knowledge of this type of construction at all. He then told me his primary
> business is working with large planes like 747's, Airbuses, and the sort.
> O.K. I think this shouldn't be a problem, I couldn't care either way what
> he knows. As long as this process is done and goes smooth.
>
> Then we hap hardedly get into the subject of his fee. He tells me that his
> fee will be $2500.00. I start to laugh because I think he is lightening the
> mood with a joke. He turns to me, with a stone cold face, and says , " I'm
> serious...."
>
> My first thought was to ask him, "Are you F........ing crazy?" But I stood
> back for a second and tried to compose my thoughts. I noted to him that his
> price was a bit high compared to what I have heard other DAR's are getting.
> His response was, "The only reason I even decided to take this project on
> was because he thought it would be interesting." Going on to tell me that
> with amount of time and effort he would be spending on this project (4 to 5
> days) he was giving me a good deal. He said, that when I crash and destroy
> someone's property, It would be his ass on the line.
>
> Well I turn to my good friend that sat in on the meeting, and asked if he
> would pinch me. So that I could wake up and start this nightmare from the
> begging. I never thought to ask him over the phone six months ago what his
> fee would be. I thought from reading post on the list and articles in the
> magazines that the rate would be $300.00 to $600.00.
>
> He told me to take a couple of days to decide. Well Before he could go any
> further I told him I would not be needing his services.
>
> I ask the list this, Am I that out of touch with reality, or did this guy
> think I was a live one?
>
> Now I scrambling to find a DAR at the 11th hour. Any ideas?
>
> John W. Tarabocchia
>
> 601hds N6042T Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
> Airframe 100% Complete...
> Installing Wire and Engine...
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
While there are, no doubt, experts out there, I'll butt in with the
following. To get the efficiency, translate speed, you need laminar flow.
But with rain or bugs on the lifting surface, no laminar flow, hence no
lift. When they say it won't fly in the rain they mean it. That is why
Chris designs airfoils that are fun to fly in a variety of conditions rather
than sacrificing safety for speed.
Of course any right thinking person, such as myself, will understand that
the 701 is already as fast as man ought to fly, and not lust after speed or
good looks.
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: Thilo Kind <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 8:31 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
> Hi Perry,
>
> you mentioned something about canard and rain. Do you have any specifis on
> that?
>
> Thanks
>
> Thilo Kind
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dr. Perry
> > Morrison
> > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 8:08 PM
> > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <kjl33u(at)ezy.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:02 AM
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> >
> >
> > > > I plan to "tuff" my wings and see where the air actually breaks
> > > loose during the stall, I plan to photograph the actual separation
> > > and show it to some NASA engineers. We have a lot of them at here
> > > at the field I fly out of and they are currently working on VG's
> > > for the long-ezy and several other "plastic" airplanes.
> > >
> > > Ken Lennox 601HDS TD N99KL
> >
> > I thought the long ez challenges of VGs were worked out long ago
> > and are commercially available as a fix to the loss of lift the canard
> > experiences in rain. Wonder what they're working on?
> >
> > Perry Morrison
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: nightmare... |
Are any of you in Western Oregon and know any DAR's in this area? I have to
start think ahead as I am at a point where this fun project could be an
airplane by this summer.
Richard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)tstar.net> |
Turbulent flow is not as good as laminar but still stays attached to the
wing, I suspect that no Zenith has laminar flow.
Chuck D.
----- Original Message -----
From: HOLCOMBE <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
> While there are, no doubt, experts out there, I'll butt in with the
> following. To get the efficiency, translate speed, you need laminar
flow.
> But with rain or bugs on the lifting surface, no laminar flow, hence no
> lift. When they say it won't fly in the rain they mean it. That is why
> Chris designs airfoils that are fun to fly in a variety of conditions
rather
> than sacrificing safety for speed.
> Of course any right thinking person, such as myself, will understand that
> the 701 is already as fast as man ought to fly, and not lust after speed
or
> good looks.
> Richard
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Thilo Kind <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 8:31 PM
> Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
>
>
> >
> > Hi Perry,
> >
> > you mentioned something about canard and rain. Do you have any specifis
on
> > that?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Thilo Kind
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dr. Perry
> > > Morrison
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 8:08 PM
> > > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <kjl33u(at)ezy.net>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:02 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
> > >
> > >
> > > > > I plan to "tuff" my wings and see where the air actually breaks
> > > > loose during the stall, I plan to photograph the actual separation
> > > > and show it to some NASA engineers. We have a lot of them at here
> > > > at the field I fly out of and they are currently working on VG's
> > > > for the long-ezy and several other "plastic" airplanes.
> > > >
> > > > Ken Lennox 601HDS TD N99KL
> > >
> > > I thought the long ez challenges of VGs were worked out long ago
> > > and are commercially available as a fix to the loss of lift the canard
> > > experiences in rain. Wonder what they're working on?
> > >
> > > Perry Morrison
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vortex generators |
Looking at the Micro-Aero site with interest regarding my Cherokee 140, I
couldn't help but think how they might help an 801/701 design. Obviously the
wing mounted ones probably wont do much since the leading edge slats provide
plenty of air to the top side already. Also the rudder really doesn't seem
to need any help. But the stab/elevator could use some help at slow speed
and full aft stick I am told. What about vgs on the bottom front of the
elevator? If they could be placed to give the elevator a slower stall speed
wouldn't this help keep the nose out of the pot holes at slower speeds? Just
thinking out loud.
Jim Ingram
Yamhill, Oregon
CH801 Mazda 13B Working on engine conversion
jimingerman1(at)home.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Mucker" <mmucker(at)airmail.net> |
With those rivet heads sticking up? No way is it laminar! :)
-Matt
> -----Original Message-----
> Turbulent flow is not as good as laminar but still stays attached to the
> wing, I suspect that no Zenith has laminar flow.
> Chuck D.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
maybee some of you have seen this, but for what its worth here is an
interesting court decision that could affect many of us.
http://www.ellison-fluid-systems.com/homebuilt_court_decision.htm
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LEO CORBALIS" <l.corbalis(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Don't bother to try trimming the ailerons up. I tried up to 4 turns on each
push rod. You fly more nose up with maybe 1 knot speed increase. Power off
glide is a close match for the Space Shuttle. I mean DOWN NOW !!!
If you want to try, practice soaring on a sewer lid.
Leo Corbalis N1229G
archive
________________________________________________________________________________
Actually, there is always some amount of laminar flow on a wing. It is a
matter of how far back, as a percent of the cord, it goes that makes it what
is typically called a laminar flow wing, or not. If I remember correctly,
the wings that are called laminar flow have this flow to about the 50%
point, or a bit beyond. They are tagged as laminar flow wings. If I also
remember some of my aerodynamics correctly, you can't have a 100% laminar
flow wing. It would produce zero lift. Something about needing to produce
a vortex behind the airfoil to have lift. I'm not real sure on this last
point, but I do seem to remember that. Perhaps someone can verify.
Jim Weston
McDonough, Ga.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Mucker [mailto:mmucker(at)airmail.net]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 12:41 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
With those rivet heads sticking up? No way is it laminar! :)
-Matt
> -----Original Message-----
> Turbulent flow is not as good as laminar but still stays attached to the
> wing, I suspect that no Zenith has laminar flow.
> Chuck D.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Ferris <ferret(at)forbin.com> |
| Subject: | Re: court decision |
It's cases like that which demonstrate out court system is the best that
money can buy. Many times whoever has the deeper pockets wins because they
have the most resources and time to pay lawyers while they drag-out the
proceedings. That sure makes me a lot less likely to ever get a policy
with Avemco when I'm ready to fly. Court descisions like that could kill
experimental avaition; if you can't make a simple mod, you might as well
buy a certified A/C.
Greg
Jim Ingram wrote:
>
> maybee some of you have seen this, but for what its worth here is an
> interesting court decision that could affect many of us.
>
> http://www.ellison-fluid-systems.com/homebuilt_court_decision.htm
>
> Jim
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ivers" <jivers(at)microtech.com.au> |
Hi All,
I am building an HD with flaperons and full-width flaps (comprised of the
two wing root fairings joined by a section of flap under the fuselage.
40deg. flap in 3 stages, 15deg. flaperon with the first or 2nd stage. We
are using pushrods instead of cables for the ailerons, the flaperon effect
aceived with 2 sets of bellcranks. Probably 18 months from flying, but
c/wing, tail, fuselage R. wing complete, will try to post some photos.
Happy building,
Jim Ivers.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Sandidge <MSandidg(at)peabodygroup.com>
Date: Tuesday, 9 January 2001 5:17
Subject: Zenith-List: Stall Speed
Sandidge)
>
> Date: January 8,2000
>
> From: Mark Sandidge (msandidg(at)peabodygroup.com)
>
> Subject: Stall Speed
>
> Hi All,
>
> Was reading the latest post from AVWEB and noticed the proposed rule
> making regarding some type sport license where no third class medical
> is required. The plane can not exceed 1232 lb with a stall of not more
> than 44 mph. Also limited to two passengers.
>
> I was wondering if any of you thought the 601HDS could meet these
> requirements with flaps. I noticed the Czech web site shows some that
> will reduce stall to 65 kilometers (40mph).
>
> I was thinking if I ever have trouble in the future with my third
> class medical it would be much easier to add flaps now while building.
>
> Any thoughts/comments?
>
> Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Raker <phadr2(at)yahoo.com> |
Yeah. All those rivet heads act like micro vortex
generators! I like it.
PHR
--- Matthew Mucker wrote:
>
>
> With those rivet heads sticking up? No way is it
> laminar! :)
>
> -Matt
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Turbulent flow is not as good as laminar but still
> stays attached to the
> > wing, I suspect that no Zenith has laminar flow.
> > Chuck D.
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: court decision |
heres the accident synopsis. reading this shed a little more light on the
court decision, however the precedence is now law and we will have to live
with the courts affirmation of the decision and all its launguage.
LAX95LA180
On May 7, 1995, at 1251 hours Pacific daylight time, a home built
experimental Davenport Long-EZ, N41BF, was destroyed while attempting a
forced landing at Los Angeles, California. The aircraft was owned and
operated by the pilot and was on a local solo flight. Visual meteorological
conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed for the operation. The
certificated private pilot sustained serious injuries. The flight originated
from the Santa Monica Municipal Airport, Santa Monica, California, at 1247
on the day of the accident.
After clearing the aircraft for takeoff, the tower operator reported that
the pilot requested a flyby. He approved the request, and as the aircraft
completed the traffic pattern, he observed it flying over runway 21 at an
estimated 20 to 30 feet agl. A few seconds later, he reported receiving a
radio transmission from the pilot declaring an engine failure. After the
reported engine failure, the aircraft was observed making a left turn
approximately 1/8-mile southwest of the airport. While in the turn, the
aircraft struck overhead electrical transmission wires, severing the right
wing. The aircraft then rolled right and crashed into the attached garage of
a single-family residence.
The aircraft came to rest in an inverted attitude, becoming wedged in the
wooden garage structure. The pilot, who was unable to exit the aircraft, was
extricated by emergency personnel.
A postaccident inspection of the aircraft revealed that the electric fuel
boost pump and the mechanical, engine-driven fuel pump had both been
removed. According to the representatives of the designer, a gravity fed
fuel system had been flight-tested and was found to be unacceptable, since
the location of the fuel tanks did not provide a sufficient "head" of fuel
above the carburetor bowl to maintain the necessary fuel pressure.
The designer's construction plans state that the fuel system is "designed to
require two fuel pumps", and that these two fuel pumps are a "mandatory
requirement for safe operation, and that there is no acceptable way around
this requirement." The requirement was reiterated in the July, 1980, issue
of the Canard Pusher newsletter. This had reportedly been the first flight
following the removal of both fuel pumps.
Further examination of the fuel system revealed evidence that the fuel line
between the gascolator and the carburetor had been stretched and kinked in
the installation process. When inspected, the gascolator fuel screen
exhibited the visible presence of contaminants. The carburetor fuel filter
was clean and free of contamination. Fuel found trapped in the fuel lines
had the color and odor consistent with auto fuel.
The fuel lines from both the right and left tank sumps had been plumbed
together using a "T" fitting. The "T" fitting had then been connected
directly to the fuel selector valve. Each fuel tank had been individually
vented with the vents positioned on either side of the aft canopy frame,
over the inboard wing/fuel strake. The vents were mounted in what the
designer described as a "low pressure" area, and had also been positioned
flush with the skin of the aircraft. The designer's construction plans state
that the fuel vents should be positioned facing and protruding into the
slipstream.
The engine crankshaft was rotated and continuity was established to the
accessory gears. After removal of the No. 4 cylinder rocker box cover, valve
action was also established. Thumb compression was obtained on all four
cylinders. The engine contained oil, and the oil pressure screen was clean
and free of contamination.
The left magneto had been destroyed; however, the right magneto was removed
and a spark was obtained from all four ignition leads. The No. 1 and 3
bottom spark plugs were removed and found to be wet with oil. The No. 4
spark plug was fouled with lead.
A scotch brite pad was found installed as an air induction filter.
The shoulder harness, which had been anchored to the front seat bulkhead,
had separated. The designer's construction plans identify hard points;
however, the builder had not utilized them in the shoulder harness
installation. The designer's representative stated that the builder's method
of installation would not provide adequate support for the accelerative
loads imposed by the pilot's upper body during an impact.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Ingraham" <iflyul(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wankel Power |
I'm considering the Wankel as well as the Mid-West rotary. The Mid-West
weighs the same as a Rotax 582 and puts out 115 HP. They currently have a
601 firewall forward package on their company 601.
Good luck
Eric
>From: "Scott Hogan" <shogan(at)alumni.washington.edu>
>Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Wankel Power
>Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 08:06:00 -0800
>
>
>
>Has anyone seen or considered using a Mazda rotary engine in a 601?
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Ingraham" <iflyul(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Someone kick me, I think I'm having a nightmare..... |
John... Where are you located?? Perhaps I know someone who can help. Have
you talk to the guys in your local EAA Chapter????
Eric
>From: "John W. Tarabocchia" <zodiac.builder(at)verizon.net>
>Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Zenith-List: Someone kick me, I think I'm having a nightmare.....
>Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 22:55:27 -0500
>
>
>
>Today , after six months of waiting, a DAR that the FAA lists in my
>area,and
>I had a meeting. This meeting was to discuss an appropriate airport in my
>area to test from. Also we would go over the paper work I would need.
>Then
>we spent about an hour of question asking. He admitted to me that he has
>never handled a experimental sport plane. Which at first didn't bother me.
>I still thought he should be qualified, or the FAA would not Designate him.
>As the meeting went on I began to realize that he had very little or no
>knowledge of this type of construction at all. He then told me his primary
>business is working with large planes like 747's, Airbuses, and the sort.
>O.K. I think this shouldn't be a problem, I couldn't care either way what
>he knows. As long as this process is done and goes smooth.
>
>Then we hap hardedly get into the subject of his fee. He tells me that his
>fee will be $2500.00. I start to laugh because I think he is lightening
>the
>mood with a joke. He turns to me, with a stone cold face, and says , " I'm
>serious...."
>
>My first thought was to ask him, "Are you F........ing crazy?" But I stood
>back for a second and tried to compose my thoughts. I noted to him that
>his
>price was a bit high compared to what I have heard other DAR's are getting.
>His response was, "The only reason I even decided to take this project on
>was because he thought it would be interesting." Going on to tell me that
>with amount of time and effort he would be spending on this project (4 to 5
>days) he was giving me a good deal. He said, that when I crash and destroy
>someone's property, It would be his ass on the line.
>
>Well I turn to my good friend that sat in on the meeting, and asked if he
>would pinch me. So that I could wake up and start this nightmare from the
>begging. I never thought to ask him over the phone six months ago what his
>fee would be. I thought from reading post on the list and articles in the
>magazines that the rate would be $300.00 to $600.00.
>
>He told me to take a couple of days to decide. Well Before he could go any
>further I told him I would not be needing his services.
>
>I ask the list this, Am I that out of touch with reality, or did this guy
>think I was a live one?
>
>Now I scrambling to find a DAR at the 11th hour. Any ideas?
>
>John W. Tarabocchia
>
>601hds N6042T Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
>Airframe 100% Complete...
>Installing Wire and Engine...
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Tarabocchia <zodiac.builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Someone kick me, I think I'm having a nightmare..... |
Eric Ingraham wrote:
>
> John... Where are you located?? Perhaps I know someone who can help. Have
> you talk to the guys in your local EAA Chapter????
> Eric
>
Hi Eric,
Actually I'm an EAA member, but never joined a local chapter. Thought that I
wouldn't find the time to participate. Well with all the time I wasted with
this guy I could have done so. I got a list of DARs for northern New Jersey.
There are two more DARs on the list I can call. This time I will ask them up
front for their amateur airplane experience and fee. So as not to waste each
others time.
Thanks to all that have posted there ideas. They are very much appreciated...
--
John W. Tarabocchia
601hds N6042T Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
Airframe 100% Complete...
Installing Wire and Engine...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "P. Owens" <powens(at)inwave.com> |
After reading the initial response I then read the associated link which
outlines the court decision. I don't believe there has been any
injustice done to the homebuilt movement as a result of this decision,
what I do believe is it sends a clear message to home builders the
importance of reading and following the limitations imposed upon us by
both the FAA and the insurance carriers.
Making modifications to the aircraft is a part of what home building
is all about, another part of that home building is the responsibility
to do so an a manner which minimizes risk to ourselves and the home
building movement as a whole. We all know there are inherent risks in
modifications especially ones made by those who are not aeronautical
engineers and even by those who are. Since part of the builders
responsibility was to have those modifications checked and verified by
the FAA, the failure to do so was deemed improper. We must accept
responsibility for our actions and act in a responsible manner in the
best interest of the home building community.
Please forgive me if I have offended anyone while on my soapbox.
Phil Owens
CH-801 Builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Court Decision |
Well said, Phil. AFTER reading the court decision, I read the accident
report and was siding with the insurance company in this particular case. I
still felt it pertinent to share this information because it shows that not
only do we have to be carefull with our experiments, but also, the insurance
companies are not legally bound to bail us out unless we "take care of
buisness" with the FAA.
One thing I'm still not clear on-does this mean if I certify with a normally
aspirated engine and Later I, say, add a supercharger do I have to pay a DAR
to come out and inspect my aircraft again and go through the 40 hr test
period all over? Or is this just a form I send in and then wait for the FAA
to get back to decide if I need an inspection?
Jim Ingram
Yamhill, Oregon
jimingerman1(at)home.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <steved(at)nc.rr.com> |
In the last few years hasn't there been a different set of operating
limitations issued on homebuilts, one that specifically precludes having
to notify the FAA of changes? Changing the propeller was one example cited
that would have required notifying the FAA and getting reinspected, but
under the new operating limitations that are now being issued the builder
need only put an entry in the proper logbook and fly a short test period.
Under these type of operating limitations cases like the one mentioned
should not occur for recently built homebuilts like the ones currently
under construction. I have also seen that builders with the older
limitations can reapply and get the less restrictive limitations assigned.
Look on rec.aviation.homebuilt for more discussion of this topic.
Steve Danielson
http://home.nc.rr.com/danielson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Mucker" <mmucker(at)airmail.net> |
The rules on what you're asking have changed since this case was in court.
Nowadays, it seems that we can make virtually ANY change to our aircraft,
look at it, say "yep... it's airworthy," log it, and be legal.
I'd take this question to EAA if I were you.
-Matt
> -----Original Message-----
> One thing I'm still not clear on-does this mean if I certify with
> a normally
> aspirated engine and Later I, say, add a supercharger do I have
> to pay a DAR
> to come out and inspect my aircraft again and go through the 40 hr test
> period all over? Or is this just a form I send in and then wait
> for the FAA
> to get back to decide if I need an inspection?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dick Baner <db8(at)mtco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Court Decision |
Jim, there is a new procedure that allows you to make major modifications to
your homebuilt without the need of a new inspection. This includes changing the
type of engine even. It does require you to do new flight testing and no
passengers until the retesting is complete. Actually what you have to do is
contact your local FSDO office and request a change in the operating limitations
issued for you plane. The old style limitations prohitited major modifications
whereas the new ones they will issue provide for the new procedure and test
flight, etc. It is importantant to point out that this priviledge is only
available if you get the new operating limitations issued to you before making
the change. The details on this program were discussed within the last year in
the EAA magazine and I am now changing my engine under the new limitations that
I requested, took about a month. Dick Baner
Jim Ingram wrote:
>
> Well said, Phil. AFTER reading the court decision, I read the accident
> report and was siding with the insurance company in this particular case. I
> still felt it pertinent to share this information because it shows that not
> only do we have to be carefull with our experiments, but also, the insurance
> companies are not legally bound to bail us out unless we "take care of
> buisness" with the FAA.
>
> One thing I'm still not clear on-does this mean if I certify with a normally
> aspirated engine and Later I, say, add a supercharger do I have to pay a DAR
> to come out and inspect my aircraft again and go through the 40 hr test
> period all over? Or is this just a form I send in and then wait for the FAA
> to get back to decide if I need an inspection?
>
> Jim Ingram
> Yamhill, Oregon
> jimingerman1(at)home.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <rich(at)carol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 revisions/updates |
I noticed that the new updates for the fuel tank installation show that
when installing a 2nd fuel tank in each wing, the fuel line hole is no
longer drilled thru the flaperon bracket in rib #1. Before the updates
were available I put the hole thru the bracket just like the plans said
with the additional rivet. Will this still be ok? I would also like to
put it this way on the left wing I am working on now because there is
more room (the fuel tank bracket is in the way).
Anyone ask Zenith about this yet? I hope to get an answer from you guys
to avoid wasting the entire weekend.
Thanks
Rich
801 Subaru EG33
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au> |
Some people may have missed this report on a builder's experiences
after 250 hrs flying.
http://www.gezub.org.uk/html/body_250_hr_report.html
Perry Morrison
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Ferris <ferret(at)forbin.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Court Decision |
The accident report sure put things in a different light. It appears that guy
was not simply making a change; he was making a change that contradicted the
designer's wishes. The use of scotch brite for an intake filter tells you that
this was not a safe builder. I've heard of being cheap but sheesh!
Greg
Jim Ingram wrote:
>
> Well said, Phil. AFTER reading the court decision, I read the accident
> report and was siding with the insurance company in this particular case. I
> still felt it pertinent to share this information because it shows that not
> only do we have to be carefull with our experiments, but also, the insurance
> companies are not legally bound to bail us out unless we "take care of
> buisness" with the FAA.
>
> One thing I'm still not clear on-does this mean if I certify with a normally
> aspirated engine and Later I, say, add a supercharger do I have to pay a DAR
> to come out and inspect my aircraft again and go through the 40 hr test
> period all over? Or is this just a form I send in and then wait for the FAA
> to get back to decide if I need an inspection?
>
> Jim Ingram
> Yamhill, Oregon
> jimingerman1(at)home.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Collins <collins(at)pali.com> |
| Subject: | Re: A review of 601 |
I just read the report and I have a question for other Zodiac
builders. Alan Cozens, the report's author and builder, said
his empty weight was 672 lbs. and that he "built as light as
possible" using the Zenith specified 912. Then Zenith web
site
says, however, that the empty weight should be 570 lbs.
For you other builders who have completed your Zodiacs, how
much does your plane weigh? I am attracted to the large usable
load the Zenith advertises, but it is of no use if the build
weight is not at all unobtainable.
Thanks
Bob Collins
Sunnyvale CA
BTW, the web page for the report is broken. You may need to read
it using "view source".
"Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
>
>
> Some people may have missed this report on a builder's experiences
> after 250 hrs flying.
>
> http://www.gezub.org.uk/html/body_250_hr_report.html
>
> Perry Morrison
>
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Pelletier" <pelletie1(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EAA local chapters |
Hi,
I live in Montreal area, L'Assomption and I'd like to join a local EAA
chapter (french) if possible. Is anyone can provide info about that.
Where, when and how...
Thanks
Daniel Pelletier
L'Assomption
601 HDS W/SUBARU EA 81
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com> |
| Subject: | Re: A review of 601 |
At 03:03 AM 13-01-2001 , you wrote:
>builders. Alan Cozens, the report's author and builder, said
>his empty weight was 672 lbs. and that he "built as light as
Don't panic. It's a modified 601. A typical HDS (or HD?) with a 912 will
weigh 600-620 lb empty, depending on how well equipped it is. There have
been Zenith list threads about weights in the past too, including a couple
summaries listing the weights of multiple 601's.
Alan's aircraft is well known to British Zenith builders. From the emails
and articles I've read, Alan built the aircraft with meticulous care. His
912 powered 601 HD has a firewall moved 4" forward (ie, lengthened
fuselage), an extended tailplane, dual sticks, a forward opening canopy of
his own design, a solid paint job (2 coats of epoxy, 2 coats of
polyurethane), etc. I can't identify what particular mods changed the
weight the most, but it adds up.
Ref.: Zenith list thread in Jan. 1997 on British 601's, especially with
regard to longitudinal stability
Peter Chapman
Toronto, ON
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stall Speed (& tuft tests & vortex generators) |
At 05:27 PM 11-01-2001 , you wrote:
>Somone (Peter Chapman?) recently posted some photos of 'tuft tests' he has
>conducted on the wings and canopy. Those should help determine where the
So far I've only tufted the canopy, and posted one photo at my site. Am
looking forward to seeing wing tuft test results. Maybe Ken Lennox will get
photos first.
All the vortex generator stuff sounds interesting, but gets into serious
experimentation. Even in a 601 HDS, increasing cruise speed is perhaps a
more worthwhile goal than reducing stall speed, unless one flies from a
short rough airstrip. In addition to the Microaero web site, a couple minor
sources of info are:
-- EAA Experimenter Oct '94 issue (An article on v.g.'s)
-- Sport Aviation Sept '94 (Profile of the G-200 aerobatic aircraft. The
prototype used v.g.'s, although I don't recall seeing any later examples do
so)
-- Sport Aviation July '92 (More fun than useful. Article covers a 'mad
inventor' who covered his C-150 with hundreds of v.g.'s and other STOL
devices.)
None of these sources provide full details on size and positioning, but
each offers some clues.
Peter Chapman
Toronto, ON 601 HDS / 912 / C-GZDC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 801 revisions/updates |
| From: | STEFREE(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: A review of 601 |
In a message dated 1/13/01 1:14:27 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
collins(at)pali.com writes:
> Alan Cozens, the report's author and builder, said
> his empty weight was 672 lbs. and that he "built as light as
> possible" using the Zenith specified 912. Then Zenith web
> site
> says, however, that the empty weight should be 570 lbs.
>
>
I could be wrong...(usually am) but I think ZAC's 570 = airframe less engine.
In all of the reports I have seen I haven't seen anyone come in under
600lbs. ZAC's ad for build time of 400hrs only includes airframe
construcion. I got this straight from the source after much probing. I
think that ZAC considers their responisbility complete at the completion of
the airframe itself. You are responsible for firewall forward, upholstery
and all instrumentation and fuel system decisions.
My humble .02.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Darryl West" <rdwest(at)cadvision.com> |
| Subject: | Re: A review of 601 |
Bob:
My 601 HD trike 912 came out under 600 lbs.
Mine is not fully painted, no wheel pants, but upgraded to heavier
trailer-type tires instead of the lighter wheelbarrow tires supplied with
the kit (wore out quickly).
Also, I don't have the extra locker wing tanks, and did not extend the nose
and tail (as Alan Cozens did).
Darryl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Collins" <collins(at)pali.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 1:03 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: A review of 601
>
> I just read the report and I have a question for other Zodiac
> builders. Alan Cozens, the report's author and builder, said
> his empty weight was 672 lbs. and that he "built as light as
> possible" using the Zenith specified 912. Then Zenith web
> site
> says, however, that the empty weight should be 570 lbs.
>
> For you other builders who have completed your Zodiacs, how
> much does your plane weigh? I am attracted to the large usable
> load the Zenith advertises, but it is of no use if the build
> weight is not at all unobtainable.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob Collins
> Sunnyvale CA
>
> BTW, the web page for the report is broken. You may need to read
> it using "view source".
>
>
> "Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
> >
> >
> > Some people may have missed this report on a builder's experiences
> > after 250 hrs flying.
> >
> > http://www.gezub.org.uk/html/body_250_hr_report.html
> >
> > Perry Morrison
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | 601 empty weight |
Mine clocks in at 609 lbs - 912, smaller radiator inside the cowl, oil
cooler inside the cowl, 24 lb battery, with minimum instruments except an
artificial horizon. Fuel tank is the std in-fuselage. No landing light.
Radio is hand-held, mounted in panel. Only extra strengthening is two
additional Ls under the baggage shelf.
Dave Austin 601HDS
daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Pelletier" <pelletie1(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV'S instruments |
Hi,
I'm choosing my engine gauges and flight instruments, i saw a nice selection
at good price on Van's Aircraft web site. Is anybody try those instruments.
Is that a good choice? Any comments would be appreciate.
Daniel Pelletier
601 HDS builder w/subaru EA 81
Frame 90% complete
Installing gauges,panel, cowling...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Pelletier" <pelletie1(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV'S instruments |
Hi,
I'm choosing my engine gauges and flight instruments, i saw a nice selection
at good price on Van's Aircraft web site. Is anybody try those instruments.
Is that a good choice? Any comments would be appreciate.
Daniel Pelletier
601 HDS builder w/subaru EA 81
Frame 90% complete
Installing gauges,panel, cowling...
>From: "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au>
>Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Zenith-List: A review of 601
>Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 12:03:55 +0930
>
>
>
>Some people may have missed this report on a builder's experiences
>after 250 hrs flying.
>
>
>http://www.gezub.org.uk/html/body_250_hr_report.html
>
>
>Perry Morrison
>
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Frisby" <marslander(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 revisions/updates |
I haven't asked ZAC, in fact I'm surprised there is a change, the home page
still says the file was updated 6/99. Last night, I drilled the 7/8 hole in
that bracket for my second wing. I have to say, I was concerned about the
"hump" in the aux tank fuel line routing with the "thru the bracket" route.
I think the upper route is going to be worse. Unless I hear a good reason,
I'm going thru the bracket.
Jim Frisby
>I noticed that the new updates for the fuel tank installation show that
>when installing a 2nd fuel tank in each wing, the fuel line hole is no
>longer drilled thru the flaperon bracket in rib #1. Before the updates
>were available I put the hole thru the bracket just like the plans said
>with the additional rivet. Will this still be ok? I would also like to
>put it this way on the left wing I am working on now because there is
>more room (the fuel tank bracket is in the way).
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EAA local chapters |
I don't know if EAA has local chapters. I am a member
of the EAA, but also the RAA. And we have RAA chapter
meetings every month on the second wednesday at the
St-Hubert airport. You are welcomed to join us.
Michel
--- Daniel Pelletier wrote:
> Pelletier"
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I live in Montreal area, L'Assomption and I'd like
> to join a local EAA
> chapter (french) if possible. Is anyone can provide
> info about that.
> Where, when and how...
>
> Thanks
>
> Daniel Pelletier
> L'Assomption
> 601 HDS W/SUBARU EA 81
> >
> >
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
Hi Bob,
my 601 HDs with Rotax 912 came in at 619 lbs, which some builders considered
a little bit heavier than normal. On the other hand, I have a few extras
(large sub panel, landing lights, insulated and carpet-line cabin, a few
more L-angles, etc.)
I would consider 672 lbs heavy. Isn't Alan's plane certified under british
rules? There was something about a modification on the 601, that was
required by the british equivalent of the FAA (make the fuselage longer and
/ or the stabilizer wider). Don't remember all the details, but there was
some discussion a while back - you might want to check the archives.
Thilo Kind
had a wonderful day of flying the CH 601 HDS today. Only one problem: ducks
on the runway - saw them, when I was on final.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Collins
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 3:04 AM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: A review of 601
>
>
> I just read the report and I have a question for other Zodiac
> builders. Alan Cozens, the report's author and builder, said
> his empty weight was 672 lbs. and that he "built as light as
> possible" using the Zenith specified 912. Then Zenith web
> site
> says, however, that the empty weight should be 570 lbs.
>
> For you other builders who have completed your Zodiacs, how
> much does your plane weigh? I am attracted to the large usable
> load the Zenith advertises, but it is of no use if the build
> weight is not at all unobtainable.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob Collins
> Sunnyvale CA
>
> BTW, the web page for the report is broken. You may need to read
> it using "view source".
>
>
> "Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Some people may have missed this report on a builder's experiences
> > after 250 hrs flying.
> >
> > http://www.gezub.org.uk/html/body_250_hr_report.html
> >
> > Perry Morrison
> >
> > >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thilo Kind" <m_tkind(at)sprynet.com> |
| Subject: | EAA local chapters |
Hi Daniel,
check out the EAA web page (www.eaa.org). They have a list and some basic
info (meeting time and places) for all the local chapters.
Thilo Kind
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Daniel
> Pelletier
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 10:57 AM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: EAA local chapters
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I live in Montreal area, L'Assomption and I'd like to join a
> local EAA
> chapter (french) if possible. Is anyone can provide info about that.
> Where, when and how...
>
> Thanks
>
> Daniel Pelletier
> L'Assomption
> 601 HDS W/SUBARU EA 81
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Re: A review of 601 |
| From: | Jim <jashford(at)hawaii.rr.com> |
Bob,
My 912 601HDS tri came in at 593 pounds unpainted. Extras included strobes,
vacuum pump with necessary regulator & filter, IFR panel and King in panel
radio and transponder. If Cozens didn't add extra equipment, his scale needs
checking.
Jim Ashford
N 601Q-bird in bed until mid-June
> From: Collins <collins(at)pali.com>
> Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 00:03:33 -0800
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: A review of 601
>
>
> I just read the report and I have a question for other Zodiac
> builders. Alan Cozens, the report's author and builder, said
> his empty weight was 672 lbs. and that he "built as light as
> possible" using the Zenith specified 912. Then Zenith web
> site
> says, however, that the empty weight should be 570 lbs.
>
> For you other builders who have completed your Zodiacs, how
> much does your plane weigh? I am attracted to the large usable
> load the Zenith advertises, but it is of no use if the build
> weight is not at all unobtainable.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob Collins
> Sunnyvale CA
>
> BTW, the web page for the report is broken. You may need to read
> it using "view source".
>
>
> "Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
>>
>>
>> Some people may have missed this report on a builder's experiences
>> after 250 hrs flying.
>>
>> http://www.gezub.org.uk/html/body_250_hr_report.html
>>
>> Perry Morrison
>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Loer" <rloer(at)mighty.net> |
| Subject: | ch 701 good for me? |
I am 6'1" and 235 lb.. Have I chosen the wrong plane for me now that I
have the plans? What do you who have flown in one think?
I would prefer a 4 stroke engine and not the Rotax (budget, you know).
Thanks
Robert Loer
rloer(at)mighty.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SkyKingN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: ch 701 good for me? |
Bob, I would expect so. I am 5'9" and find that my pedals are to far forward
for me. I am going to ad a seat coushin to mine, try and get my butt closer
to the pedals. My son is just under 6' and he fits in
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ualski <ualski(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ch 701 good for me? |
Robert Loer wrote:
>
>
> I am 6'1" and 235 lb.. Have I chosen the wrong plane for me now that I
> have the plans? What do you who have flown in one think?
>
> I would prefer a 4 stroke engine and not the Rotax (budget, you know).
Robert,
I'm the same height as you although 60 lbs lighter. Lengthwise I fit in
just fine. For reference, I'd say that the CH701 dimensionally similar
to a C150 except the cabin is a little wider.
-- Aaron Sliwinski
ualski(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Danielson" <steved(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ch 701 good for me? |
Hi Robert,
I am 6'2" and 225 lbs, and the 701 is a perfect fit for me. I have a
6'3"-6'4" friend and it is tight for him. It is more roomier than a C-152
cabin and visibility is much greater than in the C-152.
Steve Danielson
http://home.nc.rr.com/danielson/
>
> I am 6'1" and 235 lb.. Have I chosen the wrong plane for me now that I
> have the plans? What do you who have flown in one think?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <rich(at)carol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 801 revisions/updates |
Ok thanks for the info. I'll probably go thru the cracket again like the
original plans called for. This will keep the down slope.
Rich
801
ulf3(at)juno.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Rich I have the aux. tanks. I did not like the original location of the
> aux. tank fuel line hole
> through rib #1 because the hole is higher that the tank outlet and its
> best to have the
> fuel lines continually sloped down to the gascolator to avoid trapping
> moisture in the line.
> I am also using 3/8 aluminum tube which has smaller OD than the rubber
> tube supplied by ZAC.
> I drilled a hole directly behind (and level with) the hole for the main
> tank fuel line and this results in a
> small radius (moon shaped) cut out in the front edge of the flaperon
> bracket (between rivets so rivet
> edge distance is respected). I did not ask ZAC about this. However, in
> subsequent discussions with
> N. Heintz he aknowledged the problem with the [original] hole location
> (higher than the tank outlet
> level.). When I spoke to him he did not say that the original design was
> defective from a structural
> standpoint just that it was a line level problem.
>
> I can't tell you which way to go. But I'm passing this along so you know
> how someone else dealt with it.
>
> Ulrich
> CH 801
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Collins <collins(at)pali.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ch 701 good for me? |
I sat in a 701 at SnF and the only dimension that is short is
the height above the seat. I at 6'3" found it too short.
That said, after checking out many planes, I would not even consider
building a plane that I had tried on for myself.
Also, again after too much research, I believe that adapting any
engine for your plane will not likely save you any money and will
cost you a lot of time. You do a conversion for the same reason
that you build a kit: because you want to build, not because it
is the cheapest way to get into the air.
Bob Collins
Sunnyvale CA
Robert Loer wrote:
>
>
> I am 6'1" and 235 lb.. Have I chosen the wrong plane for me now that I
> have the plans? What do you who have flown in one think?
>
> I would prefer a 4 stroke engine and not the Rotax (budget, you know).
>
> Thanks
>
> Robert Loer
> rloer(at)mighty.net
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 9:50 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Wankel Power
> There is a one rotor engine that puts out about 100hp and weighs about
half
> of the two rotor Mazda 13b. (135LBS)
>
> check out
>
> http://www.atkinsrotary.com/onerotor.htm
>
> Jim Ingram
> Yamhill, Oregon
> CH801 mazda 13B working on engine conversion
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Mayne" <bazmay(at)ozemail.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: A review of 601 |
G'day,
My 601 HDS came in empty at 603 lb with 4 coats paint, upholstory. VFR
instrumentation, wing tanks and header tank, wheel pants, Jabiru 3300
engine.
Barry Mayne
----- Original Message -----
From: Collins <collins(at)pali.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: A review of 601
>
> I just read the report and I have a question for other Zodiac
> builders. Alan Cozens, the report's author and builder, said
> his empty weight was 672 lbs. and that he "built as light as
> possible" using the Zenith specified 912. Then Zenith web
> site
> says, however, that the empty weight should be 570 lbs.
>
> For you other builders who have completed your Zodiacs, how
> much does your plane weigh? I am attracted to the large usable
> load the Zenith advertises, but it is of no use if the build
> weight is not at all unobtainable.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob Collins
> Sunnyvale CA
>
> BTW, the web page for the report is broken. You may need to read
> it using "view source".
>
>
> "Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
> >
> >
> > Some people may have missed this report on a builder's experiences
> > after 250 hrs flying.
> >
> > http://www.gezub.org.uk/html/body_250_hr_report.html
> >
> > Perry Morrison
> >
> > >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Collins <collins(at)pali.com> |
| Subject: | Re: A review of 601 |
Wow!
Yesterday, I flew in a 3300 equipped 601 HDS similarly
equipped and
the builder/pilot claimed 694 lbs. Makes me wonder if maybe
everyone's scales agree. I read on the Sonex mail list
about a
30 lb variation between bathroom scales and "aircraft" scales.
An additional questions might be what scales people are using.
Bob Collins
Sunnyvale CA
BTW, the web page on Alan Cozens plane has been fixed.
Barry Mayne wrote:
>
>
> G'day,
> My 601 HDS came in empty at 603 lb with 4 coats paint, upholstory. VFR
> instrumentation, wing tanks and header tank, wheel pants, Jabiru 3300
> engine.
>
> Barry Mayne
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Collins <collins(at)pali.com>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 7:03 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: A review of 601
>
> >
> > I just read the report and I have a question for other Zodiac
> > builders. Alan Cozens, the report's author and builder, said
> > his empty weight was 672 lbs. and that he "built as light as
> > possible" using the Zenith specified 912. Then Zenith web
> > site
> > says, however, that the empty weight should be 570 lbs.
> >
> > For you other builders who have completed your Zodiacs, how
> > much does your plane weigh? I am attracted to the large usable
> > load the Zenith advertises, but it is of no use if the build
> > weight is not at all unobtainable.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Bob Collins
> > Sunnyvale CA
> >
> > BTW, the web page for the report is broken. You may need to read
> > it using "view source".
> >
> >
> > "Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote:
> > >
>
> > >
> > > Some people may have missed this report on a builder's experiences
> > > after 250 hrs flying.
> > >
> > > http://www.gezub.org.uk/html/body_250_hr_report.html
> > >
> > > Perry Morrison
> > >
> > > >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au> |
| Subject: | 601 Perfomance- was A review of 601 |
A lot of people have provided their 601 enpty weights.
How about some performance figures?
Perry Morrison
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Loer" <rloer(at)mighty.net> |
| Subject: | Read this and be careful ! |
Check out the story and pictures at this site. Then be careful when
flight testing.
Robert Loer
http://www.iland.net/~skydon/crash1.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 601 Perfomance- was A review of 601 |
Attached is a spreadsheet I put together with some performance numbers.
I started to search the archives for more of them but, after an hour of
looking, gave up. I'd be happy to add numbers to this if anybody wants
to contribute.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Perry Morrison" <perry(at)octa4.net.au>
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 7:03 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 601 Perfomance- was A review of 601
>
> A lot of people have provided their 601 enpty weights.
> How about some performance figures?
>
> Perry Morrison
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Glen.Worstell(at)seagate.com |
01/15/2001 11:03:03 AM
> how much does your plane weigh?
601HD Trike, painted, 8 gal fuse tank, 2 6 gal wing tanks, 2nd battery and
alternator, upholstery, lotsa insts for IFR. Empty weight including oil and
coolant but no fuel: 700 lbs. No wheel pants yet, btw.
I believe that a day vfr 601HD without lots of upholstery should weigh
about 600 lbs.
g.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LEO CORBALIS" <l.corbalis(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Rick Thomason please send me a phone number and acceptable calling times. I
have just gotten a Sport Prop, inflight adjustable. I have several
questions, needless to say, after reading the manual.
Leo Corbalis 408-262-5734
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Johann G. Johannsson" <johann(at)caa.is> |
| Subject: | Re: Where in Iceland |
Hi Randy and Zenith list members.
Here is my new home page, created by my oldest son, David.
It is different from the one I made myself, and with faster loading
pictures.
I hope you like this one better.
Please take a look.
http://www.gi.is/fis/index.htm
Sorry about the Zenith and Kolb links, they still need to be corrected.
We are working on that.
Best regards,
Johann G
Iceland.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Pelletier" <pelletie1(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: elec trim kit |
Hi,
I'd like to get info about electric trim kit. I saw on the list that some
builders uses the Mac system. Is that the system sold by Zac. Is that a
dual control system for elevator and ailerons. Where to buy this system and
what's the price.
Thanks for info.
Daniel
601 HDS W/subaru
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gerald F. Adams" <gadams(at)thezone.net> |
would you please remove me from your mailing list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Fothergill <mfothergill(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: elec trim kit |
It is the Mac system as used by ZAC. They are individual units for the
elevator and aileron ie. interchangeable.
Mike
UHS Spinners
C-FRND 601HDS
Daniel Pelletier wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
> I'd like to get info about electric trim kit. I saw on the list that some
> builders uses the Mac system. Is that the system sold by Zac. Is that a
> dual control system for elevator and ailerons. Where to buy this system and
> what's the price.
>
> Thanks for info.
>
> Daniel
> 601 HDS W/subaru
>
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "C S Riley" <csriley(at)ix.netcom.com> |
Is anyone using something other than the MAC system for operating trim tabs?
I know Custom Planes has had a couple of articles about using servos from RC
planes. The November 2000 issue had an article on that subject. I can't
locate that issue and would appreciate a copy of that article if anyone
might be able to send (FAX) me a copy.
Stu Riley
CH601XL Scratch Built
Working on tail feathers.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Royer, Michel" <RoyerM(at)tc.gc.ca> |
In regards to the servo, if anyone has ordered them from Aircraft Spruce
i would like to know which model they are using, because the different model
do travel different length and i'm not sure which one i should use.....
Another question......when the specs says 1" travel ..is that total
or is it 1" up and 1" down????????
Thx
Michel Royer
> ----------
> From: Daniel Pelletier[SMTP:pelletie1(at)hotmail.com]
> Reply To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:00 PM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: elec trim kit
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
> I'd like to get info about electric trim kit. I saw on the list that some
>
> builders uses the Mac system. Is that the system sold by Zac. Is that a
> dual control system for elevator and ailerons. Where to buy this system
> and
> what's the price.
>
> Thanks for info.
>
> Daniel
> 601 HDS W/subaru
>
>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
I ordered the MAC 4A system for both elevator and
aileron. I don't believe I could have installed a
"recessed" aileron trim tab with this servo.
--- "Royer, Michel" wrote:
>
>
> In regards to the servo, if anyone has ordered them
> from Aircraft Spruce
> i would like to know which model they are using,
> because the different model
> do travel different length and i'm not sure which
> one i should use.....
> Another question......when the specs says 1" travel
> ..is that total
> or is it 1" up and 1" down????????
>
> Thx
> Michel Royer
>
> > ----------
> > From: Daniel
> Pelletier[SMTP:pelletie1(at)hotmail.com]
> > Reply To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:00 PM
> > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: elec trim kit
> >
> Pelletier"
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> > I'd like to get info about electric trim kit. I
> saw on the list that some
> >
> > builders uses the Mac system. Is that the system
> sold by Zac. Is that a
> > dual control system for elevator and ailerons.
> Where to buy this system
> > and
> > what's the price.
> >
> > Thanks for info.
> >
> > Daniel
> > 601 HDS W/subaru
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: elec trim kit |
I can't look inside my elevator right now, but I'm fairly certain the
ZAC-supplied
trim servo is the 4A one. The total travel, end-to-end, is about an inch.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Royer, Michel" <RoyerM(at)tc.gc.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 8:15 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: elec trim kit
>
> In regards to the servo, if anyone has ordered them from Aircraft Spruce
> i would like to know which model they are using, because the different
model
> do travel different length and i'm not sure which one i should use.....
> Another question......when the specs says 1" travel ..is that total
> or is it 1" up and 1" down????????
>
> Thx
> Michel Royer
>
> > ----------
> > From: Daniel Pelletier[SMTP:pelletie1(at)hotmail.com]
> > Reply To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:00 PM
> > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: elec trim kit
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> > I'd like to get info about electric trim kit. I saw on the list that
some
> >
> > builders uses the Mac system. Is that the system sold by Zac. Is that
a
> > dual control system for elevator and ailerons. Where to buy this system
> > and
> > what's the price.
> >
> > Thanks for info.
> >
> > Daniel
> > 601 HDS W/subaru
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Re: elec trim kit |
The elevator trim for the 801 is the Menzimer 8A servo. Full specs are at
http://www.menzimeraircraft.com/
Just for interest, there was a discussion by users of rechargeable
screwdrivers as servo motors on rec.aviation.homebuilt! (No, I am not
going to use one.)
Gary Liming
801
www.liming.org/ch801/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Morelli" <billvt(at)together.net> |
Stu,
I have the Custom Planes article. Later today I will scan the article and
ship the files to you.
I am using the ZAC supplied MAC-4A trim servos for both Aileron and
Elevator.
Regards,
Bill
>Is anyone using something other than the MAC system for operating trim
tabs?
>I know Custom Planes has had a couple of articles about using servos from
RC
>planes. The November 2000 issue had an article on that subject. I can't
>locate that issue and would appreciate a copy of that article if anyone
>might be able to send (FAX) me a copy.
>
>Stu Riley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "C S Riley" <csriley(at)ix.netcom.com> |
Thanks Bill, I appreciate that.
Stu
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Trim Servos
>
> Stu,
>
> I have the Custom Planes article. Later today I will scan the article and
> ship the files to you.
>
> I am using the ZAC supplied MAC-4A trim servos for both Aileron and
> Elevator.
>
> Regards,
> Bill
>
> >Is anyone using something other than the MAC system for operating trim
> tabs?
> >I know Custom Planes has had a couple of articles about using servos from
> RC
> >planes. The November 2000 issue had an article on that subject. I can't
> >locate that issue and would appreciate a copy of that article if anyone
> >might be able to send (FAX) me a copy.
> >
> >Stu Riley
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Pelletier" <pelletie1(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: elec trim kit |
Hi
Thanks to all for info, I found the web side but it's changed for
www.rayallencompany.com you got info and price for the 601 HDS it's the
T2-7A-TS trim system and the price is $ 225.00 us
Regards
Daniel Pelletier
601 HDS W/Subaru
>From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
>Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: elec trim kit
>Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 10:23:15 -0600
>
>
>The elevator trim for the 801 is the Menzimer 8A servo. Full specs are at
>http://www.menzimeraircraft.com/
>
>Just for interest, there was a discussion by users of rechargeable
>screwdrivers as servo motors on rec.aviation.homebuilt! (No, I am not
>going to use one.)
>
>Gary Liming
>801
>www.liming.org/ch801/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ingram" <jimingerman1(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wankel Power |
There is a one rotor engine that puts out about 100hp and weighs about half
of the two rotor Mazda 13b. (135LBS)
check out
http://www.atkinsrotary.com/onerotor.htm
Jim Ingram
Yamhill, Oregon
CH801 mazda 13B working on engine conversion
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shay King" <shaking(at)eircom.net> |
| Subject: | fuel quantity sender |
Dear Zenith List,
I'm building a 701 from kit, have tail done and just starting to skin
the left wing skeleton now. I have the extended wing tanks, with
Stewart Warner fuel quantity system.
Has anyone installed these senders? Theres a large circular mounting
plate which I presume goes on the outside of the tank, but does inside
need reinforcing where the sender is mounted,and how do I seal the whole
thing up? CZAW recommend fitting it on the side because there's not
enough space on the top. No instructions supplied.
Would appreciate any suggestions
Regards,
Shay King
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Haas, Michael" <HaasM1(at)whiteoaksemi.com> |
| Subject: | CH801 - Heated Pitot Tubes? |
We are just getting started with the construction of our wings, and as a
result, we are starting to think more seriously about the systems. We plan
to install a heated pitot tube. Are there any models that are superior, and
are there any issues to look out for?
Michael S. Haas
Richmond, Virginia
CH-801 Builder / Serial #8-4262
mailto:Michael.Haas(at)infineon.com
________________________________________________________________________________
I'm very close to purchasing plans for a scratch build. Anyone have input
on pro's and con's of the xl vs hds (or hd). The actual performance data
isn't as extensive for the xl as for the hds and hd, but it looks to me like
the payload is about the same, but the xl is a little heavier and requires
more power to get 135 or so cruise speed.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel quantity sender |
If you can get it to seal, the side mount is preferable. The linkage inside
has to be worked out so that you get the correct electrical resistance at
empty and full; not just the top and bottom of the travel of the float
pivot. You will need a perminant but flexible sealant, maybe a two part
polyurithane.
Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: Shay King <shaking(at)eircom.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 4:25 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: fuel quantity sender
>
> Dear Zenith List,
> I'm building a 701 from kit, have tail done and just starting to skin
> the left wing skeleton now. I have the extended wing tanks, with
> Stewart Warner fuel quantity system.
> Has anyone installed these senders? Theres a large circular mounting
> plate which I presume goes on the outside of the tank, but does inside
> need reinforcing where the sender is mounted,and how do I seal the whole
> thing up? CZAW recommend fitting it on the side because there's not
> enough space on the top. No instructions supplied.
> Would appreciate any suggestions
>
> Regards,
> Shay King
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
There is a ton of discussion in the archives regarding XL vs. HDS. I would
suggest a good place to start might be there. You will find several threads
of discussion on this topic as it is something that pops up every couple of
months or so on this list.
Welcome to the community...Start building!
Steve Freeman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Ingraham" <iflyul(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wankel Power |
The engine you mention is produced by Atkins Rotary in WA. I spoke with Dave Atkins
(the rotary guru) and he said the all up flying weight of the single is around
200 lbs. It might work well in a 601 but would be toooooo heavy for the
701.........
Eric
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kent Brown" <kbplanner(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: elec trim kit |
ZAC sells a complete aileron trim kit, which includes the MAC 4A with switch
and indicator, and the trim tab, horn, and hinge. Forgot how much, but was
not much more than the servo kit alone from ACS. Check with ZAC.
Kent
----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel Pelletier <pelletie1(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: elec trim kit
>
>
> Hi
>
> Thanks to all for info, I found the web side but it's changed for
> www.rayallencompany.com you got info and price for the 601 HDS it's the
> T2-7A-TS trim system and the price is $ 225.00 us
>
> Regards
>
> Daniel Pelletier
> 601 HDS W/Subaru
>
> >From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
> >Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> >To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: elec trim kit
> >Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 10:23:15 -0600
> >
> >
> >
> >The elevator trim for the 801 is the Menzimer 8A servo. Full specs are
at
> >http://www.menzimeraircraft.com/
> >
> >Just for interest, there was a discussion by users of rechargeable
> >screwdrivers as servo motors on rec.aviation.homebuilt! (No, I am not
> >going to use one.)
> >
> >Gary Liming
> >801
> >www.liming.org/ch801/
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Sandidge" <MSandidg(at)peabodygroup.com> |
01/18/2001 12:03:12 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shay King" <shaking(at)eircom.net> |
| Subject: | cork sheet around fuel tanks CH701 |
Dear List,
I got some cork today but I think it's the wrong stuff. It's nitrile
cork, thats gasket material, very good around fuel but very heavy-7.75oz
per sq. ft. Pure cork weighs about 2.25oz per sq. ft. Can someone tell
me if it's pure cork I should use around the fuel tanks?
Regards,
Shay King.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)tstar.net> |
| Subject: | Re: cork sheet around fuel tanks CH701 |
Shay,
I ended up using cork from Home Depot, but I had asked the following of ZAC
and below is their answer.
Chuck D.
> > Thanks for the information today.
> > I can get 1/8" cork gasket material from the local auto parts, however,
> > it is impregnated with a kind of rubbery substance to make it flexible.
> > Is this material OK to put around the fuel tanks?
>
> I don't think this should be a problem, especially if the cork is held
> in place with contact cement to the tank. Where the cork will be in
> contact with the wing, prime the surface with zinc chromate to
> reduce possible corrosion.
> Nick Heintz
> Zenith Aircraft Company
----- Original Message -----
From: Shay King <shaking(at)eircom.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 1:30 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: cork sheet around fuel tanks CH701
>
> Dear List,
> I got some cork today but I think it's the wrong stuff. It's nitrile
> cork, thats gasket material, very good around fuel but very heavy-7.75oz
> per sq. ft. Pure cork weighs about 2.25oz per sq. ft. Can someone tell
> me if it's pure cork I should use around the fuel tanks?
>
> Regards,
> Shay King.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Ferris <ferret(at)forbin.com> |
| Subject: | Re: cork sheet around fuel tanks CH701 |
I used a cork bound with nitrile for fuel resistance. I did so because I
was afraid of regular cork turning into dust if it came into contact with
fuel.
Greg F.
Shay King wrote:
>
> Dear List,
> I got some cork today but I think it's the wrong stuff. It's nitrile
> cork, thats gasket material, very good around fuel but very heavy-7.75oz
> per sq. ft. Pure cork weighs about 2.25oz per sq. ft. Can someone tell
> me if it's pure cork I should use around the fuel tanks?
>
> Regards,
> Shay King.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | charles.long(at)gm.com |
| Subject: | Performance Data for Zenith 601 |
By way of introduction, my name is Chuck Long. I'm building a 601HDS, 30%
complete. By profession, I'm a control's design engineer for GM. Part of my
design duty is to model complicated fluid dynamics systems. Since everything is
non-linear we end up tieing down our models with empirical data - actual testing
in the vehicle.
10 years ago, John Roncz, a leading airfoil designer, published an
interesting article in Sport Aviation magazine (3/90) on aerodynamics for
homebuilt aircraft. This article has facinated me, and I'm been studying how
the laws of aerodynamics apply to our Zenith 601's. I have a spreadsheet I
would like to pass out to all of you, but before I do, would like to get some
good real world data to tie it down. Have been reading through the Matronics
archives looking for information, but usually important bits are missing such as
altitude, weight, engine horsepower, etc.
What we need as a builders group is a uniform method of reporting the
performance of our aircraft to make good comparisons. This info would be very
useful for the following reason: In studying our bird, it appears that there is
a considerable disparity on the drag numbers from one finished plane to the
next. I believe one culprit could be cooling drag. Another prop efficiency.
Also weights are varying considerably. Engine weights obviously vary, but full
gyro and radio panels can add another 50 lb! Exterior paint and internal
priming also add weight. It would be good to catergorize the weights of the
different options, so builders will know up front the performance penalty that
various options will cost them.
If one plane can be build fast and light, they all can be build fast and
light and we know what to look for. What I would be interested in doing is
using the spreadsheet model to determine the value of certain modifications such
as: Wheel fairings, Tri-gear vs Conventional Gear, Radiator inside or Outside,
etc. We can classify them in mph improvement at max cruise speed and record the
weight penalty also. If LePresti can bump up the performance of the Mooneys
(201 vs Exec), so can we!
We have several fellows who have offered to keep the information in a
database on the web. That's a great idea. My suggestion would be to use the
following uniform format for recording information. This will allow me to churn
the numbers through the simulator and provide drag information for individual
aircraft. Also prop efficiency, engine horsepower output, etc. Your comments
also would be appreciated! Anyone interested in a beta copy of this spread
sheet, my E-mail address is charles.long(at)gm.com
Uniform Reporting Format
Name:
E mail Address:
N Number:
601 HD or HDS?
Total Time:
Engine Type:
Max Horsepower Output:
Empty Weight:
Full Gyro Panel & Vacuum System?
Quantity of Radios:
Inner parts - Not primed, parts in contact primed, or fully primed?
Exterior Paint - none or painted and # of coats:
Tri-gear or Conventional:
Wheel Pants?
Radiator mounting location:
Oil Cooler mounting location:
Prop manufacturer:
Fixed, Ground Adjustable or In-Flight Adjustable?
Pitch:
Other Modifications of note, especially related to drag:
Test Conditions
Flying Weight:
Ambient Temperature on the Ground:
Altitude:
Performance Data
Maximum level Speed at full throttle:
(measure both directions & take an average)
Climb Speed at 90 mph IAS:
Sink speed (Engine Idle) at 70 mph IAS:
Values are True Airspeed, Inidicated Airspeed or GPS?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Collins <collins(at)pali.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance Data for Zenith 601 |
This sounds like an outstanding idea! As someone who is getting
ready to take the plunge, this kind of info would be great. As
you all probably know, Chris starts the discussion of performance
testing in his online articles.
Bob Collins
Sunnyvale CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Tarabocchia <zodiac.builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance Data for Zenith 601 |
Very good idea.......
--
John W. Tarabocchia
601hds N6042T Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
Airframe 100% Complete...
Installing Wire and Engine...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Mucker" <mmucker(at)airmail.net> |
| Subject: | Performance Data for Zenith 601 |
What a wonderful tool!
There was talk earlier this week about creating a web database of finished
planes with this type of information.
I'll look at building a database driven web site where builders can enter
this information so that it can be viewed by all this weekend. (No promises
that the web site will be done; but I'll at least do some design work.)
-Matt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> charles.long(at)gm.com
> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 6:45 AM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: Performance Data for Zenith 601
>
>
> By way of introduction, my name is Chuck Long. I'm building
> a 601HDS, 30%
> complete. By profession, I'm a control's design engineer for GM.
> Part of my
> design duty is to model complicated fluid dynamics systems.
> Since everything is
> non-linear we end up tieing down our models with empirical data -
> actual testing
> in the vehicle.
> 10 years ago, John Roncz, a leading airfoil designer, published an
> interesting article in Sport Aviation magazine (3/90) on aerodynamics for
> homebuilt aircraft. This article has facinated me, and I'm been
> studying how
> the laws of aerodynamics apply to our Zenith 601's. I have a
> spreadsheet I
> would like to pass out to all of you, but before I do, would like
> to get some
> good real world data to tie it down. Have been reading through
> the Matronics
> archives looking for information, but usually important bits are
> missing such as
> altitude, weight, engine horsepower, etc.
> What we need as a builders group is a uniform method of reporting the
> performance of our aircraft to make good comparisons. This info
> would be very
> useful for the following reason: In studying our bird, it
> appears that there is
> a considerable disparity on the drag numbers from one finished
> plane to the
> next. I believe one culprit could be cooling drag. Another
> prop efficiency.
> Also weights are varying considerably. Engine weights obviously
> vary, but full
> gyro and radio panels can add another 50 lb! Exterior paint and internal
> priming also add weight. It would be good to catergorize the
> weights of the
> different options, so builders will know up front the performance
> penalty that
> various options will cost them.
> If one plane can be build fast and light, they all can be
> build fast and
> light and we know what to look for. What I would be interested
> in doing is
> using the spreadsheet model to determine the value of certain
> modifications such
> as: Wheel fairings, Tri-gear vs Conventional Gear, Radiator
> inside or Outside,
> etc. We can classify them in mph improvement at max cruise speed
> and record the
> weight penalty also. If LePresti can bump up the performance of
> the Mooneys
> (201 vs Exec), so can we!
> We have several fellows who have offered to keep the information in a
> database on the web. That's a great idea. My suggestion would
> be to use the
> following uniform format for recording information. This will
> allow me to churn
> the numbers through the simulator and provide drag information
> for individual
> aircraft. Also prop efficiency, engine horsepower output, etc.
> Your comments
> also would be appreciated! Anyone interested in a beta copy of
> this spread
> sheet, my E-mail address is charles.long(at)gm.com
>
> Uniform Reporting Format
> Name:
> E mail Address:
> N Number:
> 601 HD or HDS?
> Total Time:
> Engine Type:
> Max Horsepower Output:
> Empty Weight:
> Full Gyro Panel & Vacuum System?
> Quantity of Radios:
> Inner parts - Not primed, parts in contact primed, or
> fully primed?
>
> Exterior Paint - none or painted and # of coats:
> Tri-gear or Conventional:
> Wheel Pants?
> Radiator mounting location:
> Oil Cooler mounting location:
> Prop manufacturer:
> Fixed, Ground Adjustable or In-Flight Adjustable?
> Pitch:
> Other Modifications of note, especially related to drag:
>
>
> Test Conditions
> Flying Weight:
> Ambient Temperature on the Ground:
> Altitude:
>
> Performance Data
> Maximum level Speed at full throttle:
> (measure both directions & take an average)
> Climb Speed at 90 mph IAS:
> Sink speed (Engine Idle) at 70 mph IAS:
> Values are True Airspeed, Inidicated Airspeed or GPS?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <rich(at)carol.net> |
| Subject: | Re: cork sheet around fuel tanks (CH801 kit) |
Your one of the lucky ones. I didn't get cork with my kit. I wouldn't
trust the peel n' stick adhesive.
Rich
801 Subaru EG33
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | 601HD center wing top skin |
I'm about to install the top skins on the center wing of my 601HD. The
ZAC-supplied skins are exactly the size shown on 6V11 - 950 x 585 mm.
If I position the skin fore-and-aft so that it extends 25mm beyond the spar
web, as shown in the center-right drawing on 6V11, it extends 8mm
aft from the vertical surface on the rear "Z". I'd think it should be flush
with that surface of the "Z" as shown on the two left-hand drawings on
6V11.
How has everyone else positioned that skin? Thanks for any help. I'm
stuck and ZAC is closed for the weekend.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The Meiste's" <meiste(at)essex1.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing top skin |
> If I position the skin fore-and-aft so that it extends 25mm beyond the
spar
> web, as shown in the center-right drawing on 6V11, it extends 8mm
> aft from the vertical surface on the rear "Z
*********************
Hi Bill,
I just ran out to the garage to verify my HD center wing top skin, and you
are correct. The top skin should stop at the back edge of the rear Z. If I
remember correctly I had to trim my top skin there also. Kind of a pain
cause that skin is THICK.
Also just cleco to the rear Z for now, latter on you'll be sliding the
fairing in-between the Z and the top skin before you rivet here.
Have fun this weekend! (I also hate not being able to get a hold of ZAC on
the two days out of the week that I do the most building also).
Kelly
601 HD & Stratus has just arrived!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Tellet" <telletdl(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance Data for Zenith 601 |
On a somewhat related issue, does anyone know if there is a weight report
for the Zenith that details the weight of all the components? I am a Naval
Architect and weights engineer and if there isn't one, I may be able to work
on one in my spare time. This would allow us to calculate exactly how
design changes will affect CG and payload considerations, and could point
out where weight savings would give us the most bang for the buck.
Any thoughts?
David Tellet, 601HD, a long way to go.
sheet, my E-mail address is charles.long(at)gm.com
>
> Uniform Reporting Format
> Name:
> E mail Address:
> N Number:
> 601 HD or HDS?
> Total Time:
> Engine Type:
> Max Horsepower Output:
> Empty Weight:
> Full Gyro Panel & Vacuum System?
> Quantity of Radios:
> Inner parts - Not primed, parts in contact primed, or fully
primed?
>
> Exterior Paint - none or painted and # of coats:
> Tri-gear or Conventional:
> Wheel Pants?
> Radiator mounting location:
> Oil Cooler mounting location:
> Prop manufacturer:
> Fixed, Ground Adjustable or In-Flight Adjustable?
> Pitch:
> Other Modifications of note, especially related to drag:
>
>
> Test Conditions
> Flying Weight:
> Ambient Temperature on the Ground:
> Altitude:
>
> Performance Data
> Maximum level Speed at full throttle:
> (measure both directions & take an average)
> Climb Speed at 90 mph IAS:
> Sink speed (Engine Idle) at 70 mph IAS:
> Values are True Airspeed, Inidicated Airspeed or GPS?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 601HD center wing top skin |
In a message dated 1/19/01 7:26:30 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
bsteer(at)gwi.net writes:
> , it extends 8mm
>
It should be flush with the rear Zee.
Steve Freeman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Tarabocchia <zodiac.builder(at)verizon.net> |
"zenith-list(at)matronics.com"
| Subject: | 0-200 Mixture Control.... |
I'm installing an 0-200 to my Zodiac 601 hds. It has a Marvel (Ma-3SPA)
carburetor. The mixture control lever faces towards the rear of the
engine. My problem is that I do not know which direction on the lever
does what. It came off of a C150. But I didn't have any opportunity to
see the installation while it was on the airplane. Does any one have any
idea of the proper way to hook up the control cable to this carb?
I appreciate any help......
--
John W. Tarabocchia
601hds N6042T Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
Airframe 100% Complete...
Installing Wire and Engine...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt(at)mondenet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel quantity sender |
Shay,
I have a similar sender in my tanks. I welded 1/8 aluminum ring on the
outside of the tanks in line with the lightning hole in the rib, and drilled
and taped these to take the mounting screws. Used cork gaskets under the
plate and sealant on the screws. No leaks after six years.
Carl
CH-701
-----Original Message-----
From: Shay King <shaking(at)eircom.net>
Date: January 17, 2001 7:39 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: fuel quantity sender
>
>Dear Zenith List,
>I'm building a 701 from kit, have tail done and just starting to skin
>the left wing skeleton now. I have the extended wing tanks, with
>Stewart Warner fuel quantity system.
>Has anyone installed these senders? Theres a large circular mounting
>plate which I presume goes on the outside of the tank, but does inside
>need reinforcing where the sender is mounted,and how do I seal the whole
>thing up? CZAW recommend fitting it on the side because there's not
>enough space on the top. No instructions supplied.
>Would appreciate any suggestions
>
>Regards,
>Shay King
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Royer, Michel" <RoyerM(at)tc.gc.ca> |
| Subject: | 0-200 Mixture Control.... |
Hi John.......did have the same problem for my O-235...i blew air with my
mouth
in the gas line-in and moved back in forth the mixture from one end to the
other
and became obvious which end was full rich and shut-off....
Michel...
> ----------
> From: John Tarabocchia[SMTP:zodiac.builder(at)verizon.net]
> Reply To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 10:28 AM
> To: engines-list(at)matronics.com; zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: 0-200 Mixture Control....
>
>
>
> I'm installing an 0-200 to my Zodiac 601 hds. It has a Marvel (Ma-3SPA)
> carburetor. The mixture control lever faces towards the rear of the
> engine. My problem is that I do not know which direction on the lever
> does what. It came off of a C150. But I didn't have any opportunity to
> see the installation while it was on the airplane. Does any one have any
> idea of the proper way to hook up the control cable to this carb?
>
> I appreciate any help......
>
> --
>
> John W. Tarabocchia
>
> 601hds N6042T Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
>
> Airframe 100% Complete...
> Installing Wire and Engine...
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | joe mock <airplane_04282(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance Data for Zenith 601 |
Well folks- you all see the message below ( so there
is no confusion)-- it is because of the inconsiderate
people on this site who can't reply directly to an
individual-- which causes "Joe" to get upset.
Therefore, instead of wasting my time trying to keep
the offenders "honest", old "Joe" is going to
un-subscribe, as many (mostly the offenders) have
suggested. I'm sure there will many "hoo-rays" from
many of you folks. However, don't let "old Joe"
leave without telling you- (if you were to check with
the folks outside the "click" you "offenders" have
done as much to hurt "homebuilding" and "this site" as
you have to help "the movement". HAPPY BUILDING--
goodbye-- "Joe"
--- John Tarabocchia
wrote:
>
>
>
> charles.long(at)gm.com
>
> Very good idea.......
>
>
> --
>
> John W. Tarabocchia
>
> 601hds N6042T Web Site:
> http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html
> Airframe 100% Complete...
> Installing Wire and Engine...
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince Veltri" <Vijan(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | 601HDS KIT FOR SALE |
601HDS Zodiac kit for sale. Wings and empennage complete. Contact for
details. $10,500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wayne B <wayne(at)perthmail.com> |
| Subject: | lycoming engine mount |
Is there an existing design to fit an O-235 L2C with dynafocal mounts to an HDS?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh! |
Hello listers,
I was making gear bearings with 1/4" UHMPWE material
this morning and I decided to do a temperature check.
I made the bearing perfectly fit the landing gear tube
at room temperature and then, I took the plastic piece
outside the house. It is 5 degree F this morning
(-15C).
When I took the bearing back inside, after a 10
minutes or so exposure to low temperature, it did not
fit the tube anymore! It is much much stiffer and
hard to move.
Does anybody have recommendations? Observations?
Regards,
Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh! huh! |
I did another test... when I put the UHMPWE bearing
under a hair dryer for 5 minutes, the hole becomes
about 0.010" (may be even more) larger than the
tube... it is very slack!
--- Michel Therrien wrote:
>
>
> Hello listers,
>
> I was making gear bearings with 1/4" UHMPWE material
> this morning and I decided to do a temperature
> check.
>
> I made the bearing perfectly fit the landing gear
> tube
> at room temperature and then, I took the plastic
> piece
> outside the house. It is 5 degree F this morning
> (-15C).
>
> When I took the bearing back inside, after a 10
> minutes or so exposure to low temperature, it did
> not
> fit the tube anymore! It is much much stiffer and
> hard to move.
>
> Does anybody have recommendations? Observations?
>
> Regards,
>
> Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Royer, Michel" <RoyerM(at)tc.gc.ca> |
| Subject: | lycoming engine mount |
Hi Wayne.......I'm putting an O-235 C1 with the conical mount. I had to get
the mount
fabricated on my own because Zenith does not fabricate the conical one but
the dynofocal you can get it from Zenith because they are putting it in the
601 XL. I got the cowling from zenith.
Not a 100% sure but i think the 601HDS and 601 XL have the same firewall,
but check that one with Nick, I just don't remember the answer but my guess
is
if the cowling fit it must be the same.....
In the event that someone would require a conical mount, the person that did
mine
still have the jig for it and is willing to build more.
Michel
> ----------
> From: Wayne B[SMTP:wayne(at)perthmail.com]
> Reply To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 4:38 AM
> To: Zenith-List Server
> Subject: Zenith-List: lycoming engine mount
>
>
> Is there an existing design to fit an O-235 L2C with dynafocal mounts to
> an HDS?
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)tstar.net> |
| Subject: | Re: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh! |
Michel,
Steel has a coefficient of thermal expansion of 1.2X10-5/DegC
Nylon 10x10-5/DegC
UHMPWE 20X10-5/DegC
1. Your tests should have both pieces at the same temp.
2. If made at 15 Deg C and the heated to 45 Deg C a 1 inch hole in UHMPWE
will
grow .006 inches (or shrink if -15 C) and a 1 in steel hole will grow .00036
inches (or shrink if -15 C)
3. A 30 deg C change for nylon would be .003 inches (1 inch hole)
4. A +/- 30 deg C change is a lot.
5. I don't know how much slack is ok.
Chuck D.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 8:59 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
>
> Hello listers,
>
> I was making gear bearings with 1/4" UHMPWE material
> this morning and I decided to do a temperature check.
>
> I made the bearing perfectly fit the landing gear tube
> at room temperature and then, I took the plastic piece
> outside the house. It is 5 degree F this morning
> (-15C).
>
> When I took the bearing back inside, after a 10
> minutes or so exposure to low temperature, it did not
> fit the tube anymore! It is much much stiffer and
> hard to move.
>
> Does anybody have recommendations? Observations?
>
> Regards,
>
> Michel
>
>
> =====
> ----------------------------
> Michel Therrien CH601-HD
> http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
> http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
>
> Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Hogan" <shogan(at)alumni.washington.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh! |
UHMW-PE has is great bearing material, but as you've seen, it has a very
high coefficient of thermal expansion. I'm not at work so I don't have the
numbers readily available. Usually when using UHMW as a bearing, it is fit
in some kind of metal housing. In your case, I'd guess that a .050" slop
at room temperature wouldn't hurt anything. You'd have to work pretty hard
to get it any tighter than that anyway. I've not started construction on
mine yet so I'm not sure exactly what the arrangement looks like - I'm
assuming its just a tube going through a plate. I have read that the factory
design is aluminum on steel and wears fairly quickly. One other
consideration is bearing thickness. 1/4" sounds a little thin, but again
I'm mostly going on imagination. I intend to modify the design on my own
when I get there.
Scott Hogan - Just took the plunge 601-HDS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 6:59 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
>
> Hello listers,
>
> I was making gear bearings with 1/4" UHMPWE material
> this morning and I decided to do a temperature check.
>
> I made the bearing perfectly fit the landing gear tube
> at room temperature and then, I took the plastic piece
> outside the house. It is 5 degree F this morning
> (-15C).
>
> When I took the bearing back inside, after a 10
> minutes or so exposure to low temperature, it did not
> fit the tube anymore! It is much much stiffer and
> hard to move.
>
> Does anybody have recommendations? Observations?
>
> Regards,
>
> Michel
>
>
> =====
> ----------------------------
> Michel Therrien CH601-HD
> http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
> http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
>
> Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Beefed up bearings? |
On the 801, and I would be willing to bet on the 701 and even the 601 as
well, the elevator is hinged with steel pins into an aluminum hinge
bracket. I have read that one of the more serious places for wear after a
few hundred hours is where steel rides against aluminum.
My questions for the esteemed list members are:
1. Does this really matter?
2. Anyone used any kind of bushing on these places, and if so, what was
used and the source?
3. On the 801, there is a little horizontal play that one of our list
members filled with a nylon washer. Are there other places in any of the
kits where this is also appropriate?
Thanks,
Gary Liming
801 builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle(at)matronics.com (Matt Dralle) |
| Subject: | Matronics Web Server Upgrade... |
B
Dear Listers,
I will be upgrading the Matronics Web Server this afternoon (1/21/01)
and will be taking it offline for a number of hours. I hope to have it
back online by this evening sometime, depending on how well the upgrade
goes.
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Email List Admin.
--
Matt G. Dralle | Matronics | P.O. Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 Voice | 925-606-6281 FAX | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ W.W.W. | Featuring Products For Aircraft
Great minds discuss ideas,
Average minds discuss events,
Small minds discuss people...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au> |
| Subject: | UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh! |
being a materials engineer I went for a maaterial that is used in high wear
applications. I went for mining grade polyeurathane. I had the PEU bearing
made for the landing gear. Ie the top bearing on my nose was used as the
template about which the bearing material was cast. This stuff is used in
extreme wear applications and does the job. If you've ever seen a one inch
rock drill rod being bent like spaghetti and the polyeurathane bearings are
what stops it from breaking, you will know what I mean. It's not the
lightest of materials but I know that it will never wear out in my plane.
mike B. 2 701's simultaneous build, badly motivated at the moment but
struggling on.477hrs and working on the forward fuses.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Scott Hogan
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
UHMW-PE has is great bearing material, but as you've seen, it has a very
high coefficient of thermal expansion. I'm not at work so I don't have the
numbers readily available. Usually when using UHMW as a bearing, it is fit
in some kind of metal housing. In your case, I'd guess that a .050" slop
at room temperature wouldn't hurt anything. You'd have to work pretty hard
to get it any tighter than that anyway. I've not started construction on
mine yet so I'm not sure exactly what the arrangement looks like - I'm
assuming its just a tube going through a plate. I have read that the factory
design is aluminum on steel and wears fairly quickly. One other
consideration is bearing thickness. 1/4" sounds a little thin, but again
I'm mostly going on imagination. I intend to modify the design on my own
when I get there.
Scott Hogan - Just took the plunge 601-HDS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 6:59 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
>
> Hello listers,
>
> I was making gear bearings with 1/4" UHMPWE material
> this morning and I decided to do a temperature check.
>
> I made the bearing perfectly fit the landing gear tube
> at room temperature and then, I took the plastic piece
> outside the house. It is 5 degree F this morning
> (-15C).
>
> When I took the bearing back inside, after a 10
> minutes or so exposure to low temperature, it did not
> fit the tube anymore! It is much much stiffer and
> hard to move.
>
> Does anybody have recommendations? Observations?
>
> Regards,
>
> Michel
>
>
> =====
> ----------------------------
> Michel Therrien CH601-HD
> http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
> http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
>
> Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Morelli" <billvt(at)together.net> |
| Subject: | I did it !!!!!!!! |
N812BM made it's first flight.
What a rush. The climb performance is outstanding. I came off the runway so
quickly that Carol missed getting a photo (plus she was freezing).
The outside air temperature was 15 deg/F. The canopy did fog up some when I
first got in but turning on my exhaust fan (thanks Mike Fothergill for the
idea) cleared the canopy up rather quickly.
I climbed above the airport to about 4000 feet (airport is at 238 ft.) and
checked out the feel. Had a slight turn to the left which the airleron trim
took out. Just need to tweak the ailerons a bit. The elevator trim remained
at neutral and was fine.
I made only one approach and landed. Greased it right in and had no handling
trouble on the runway which is 3000 feet and covered with a thin layer of
snow and ice. Prior to takeoff I had done a high speed taxi run and tried
swerving a bit to see how she handled on the snow and ice and there was no
tendency to do anything strange.
I only mad the one flight but now that it is out of the way, I'll be making
a lot more as soon as possible.
I won't give any speed numbers as I was to excited to pay attention to the
GPS. I'll post some additional information as the flights progress.
One thing I did notice was that when I throttled back to about 3500 rpm
there was a bit of a droning. I could actually see it in the vertical card
compass (vibrating). This sounds something like Wayne Beatty mentioned a
while back. I'll have to ask Wayne if he solved that. My prop tracking is
not as good as it could be so maybe that is the culprit.
One other item worth mentioning. I took a small micro cassette recorder and
connected it's MIC IN to the passenger side HEADPHONE jack. This gave me a
cockpit voice recorder that works rather well. The recorder I have is a
voice actuated type and every time I make a comment on the intercom or
radio, the recorder turns on and records it. This I feel makes the flight
test process a lot easier than trying to write everything down (especially
since I am right handed and that hand is rather busy flying). The resulting
recording is a bit noisy due to all of the cockpit noise but is certainly
useable for transcribing the data after the flight.
Anyway, I am back home now and trying to calm down.
Regards,
Bill Vermont - HDS - Stratus - Warp Drive - N812BM - Tri Gear - Full
instruments - LE and header tanks - Wheel pants - No paint
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Royer, Michel" <RoyerM(at)tc.gc.ca> |
| Subject: | I did it !!!!!!!! |
Way to go Bill, What is the lenght of your blades and how much clearance.
Michel
> ----------
> From: Bill Morelli[SMTP:billvt(at)together.net]
> Reply To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 4:52 PM
> To: Zenith List
> Subject: Zenith-List: I did it !!!!!!!!
>
>
> N812BM made it's first flight.
>
> What a rush. The climb performance is outstanding. I came off the runway
> so
> quickly that Carol missed getting a photo (plus she was freezing).
>
> The outside air temperature was 15 deg/F. The canopy did fog up some when
> I
> first got in but turning on my exhaust fan (thanks Mike Fothergill for the
> idea) cleared the canopy up rather quickly.
>
> I climbed above the airport to about 4000 feet (airport is at 238 ft.) and
> checked out the feel. Had a slight turn to the left which the airleron
> trim
> took out. Just need to tweak the ailerons a bit. The elevator trim
> remained
> at neutral and was fine.
>
> I made only one approach and landed. Greased it right in and had no
> handling
> trouble on the runway which is 3000 feet and covered with a thin layer of
> snow and ice. Prior to takeoff I had done a high speed taxi run and tried
> swerving a bit to see how she handled on the snow and ice and there was no
> tendency to do anything strange.
>
> I only mad the one flight but now that it is out of the way, I'll be
> making
> a lot more as soon as possible.
>
> I won't give any speed numbers as I was to excited to pay attention to the
> GPS. I'll post some additional information as the flights progress.
>
> One thing I did notice was that when I throttled back to about 3500 rpm
> there was a bit of a droning. I could actually see it in the vertical card
> compass (vibrating). This sounds something like Wayne Beatty mentioned a
> while back. I'll have to ask Wayne if he solved that. My prop tracking is
> not as good as it could be so maybe that is the culprit.
>
> One other item worth mentioning. I took a small micro cassette recorder
> and
> connected it's MIC IN to the passenger side HEADPHONE jack. This gave me a
> cockpit voice recorder that works rather well. The recorder I have is a
> voice actuated type and every time I make a comment on the intercom or
> radio, the recorder turns on and records it. This I feel makes the flight
> test process a lot easier than trying to write everything down (especially
> since I am right handed and that hand is rather busy flying). The
> resulting
> recording is a bit noisy due to all of the cockpit noise but is certainly
> useable for transcribing the data after the flight.
>
> Anyway, I am back home now and trying to calm down.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Vermont - HDS - Stratus - Warp Drive - N812BM - Tri Gear - Full
> instruments - LE and header tanks - Wheel pants - No paint
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Morelli" <billvt(at)together.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I did it !!!!!!!! |
I have the 70" Warp Drive three blade and the ground clearance is 8 1/2"
Bill
>Way to go Bill, What is the lenght of your blades and how much clearance.
>Michel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Mayne" <bazmay(at)ozemail.com.au> |
Congratulations Bill,
Ain't it just the most fantastic feelin'
Barry Mayne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kit Plane Boards" <Kitplane(at)tradezone.com> |
| Subject: | New Site Kitplaneforum.com |
Hello Zenith builders and flyers!
I just got this website online and thought you would like to check it out.
http://www.kitplaneforum.com/
It would be great if you could also share your Zenith information on this
forum.
Thanks!
Trip Mellinger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "fhulen" <fhulen(at)gabs.net> |
| Subject: | Kit Planes on the Discovery Channel |
A week or so ago someone posted about a program coming up on the 22nd
(tomorrow) involving Zenith aircraft in a program called "Kit Planes", said
to be on the Discovery channel. I can find it listed at the Discovery webb
site called "Discovery Wings", which seems to be a channel I didn't know
about or receive. I get the regular Discovery Channel that has all kinds of
mixed subjects, but this one seems to have all aviation stuff. For those
that receive it, is "Discovery Wings" channel available to Direct TV
satellite receivers, and if so what channel? Thanks. Fred
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Honabach" <don(at)pcperfect.com> |
| Subject: | Kit Planes on the Discovery Channel |
Fred,
Checked DirecTV's web site and it doesn't appear in their channel listings.
If any one wants to send me a tape, I'll go ahead and convert it to an AVI
format and make it available for download (assuming no lawyers come after me
for copyright stuff). I've only got DirecTV right now so looks like I'm out
of luck for recording/watching it directly. Definitely seems like it would
be neat to watch.
Regards,
Don Honabach
601HDS - Tempe, AZ - Working on Center Area
http://www.pcperfect.com/zodiac
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of fhulen
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 5:02 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Kit Planes on the Discovery Channel
A week or so ago someone posted about a program coming up on the 22nd
(tomorrow) involving Zenith aircraft in a program called "Kit Planes", said
to be on the Discovery channel. I can find it listed at the Discovery webb
site called "Discovery Wings", which seems to be a channel I didn't know
about or receive. I get the regular Discovery Channel that has all kinds of
mixed subjects, but this one seems to have all aviation stuff. For those
that receive it, is "Discovery Wings" channel available to Direct TV
satellite receivers, and if so what channel? Thanks. Fred
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Morelli" <billvt(at)together.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kit Planes on the Discovery Channel |
I too would love to see this show but my listings do not show it either.
Apparently the Discovery channel has several channels besides the main
channel one of which is the Wings channel.
Bill
>A week or so ago someone posted about a program coming up on the 22nd
>(tomorrow) involving Zenith aircraft in a program called "Kit Planes", said
>to be on the Discovery channel. I can find it listed at the Discovery webb
>site called "Discovery Wings", which seems to be a channel I didn't know
>about or receive. I get the regular Discovery Channel that has all kinds
of
>mixed subjects, but this one seems to have all aviation stuff. For those
>that receive it, is "Discovery Wings" channel available to Direct TV
>satellite receivers, and if so what channel? Thanks. Fred
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bruce Bockius <elrond(at)xprt.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I did it !!!!!!!! |
>
> N812BM made it's first flight.
Congratulations Bill!!!
> The outside air temperature was 15 deg/F. The canopy did fog up some when I
> first got in but turning on my exhaust fan (thanks Mike Fothergill for the
> idea) cleared the canopy up rather quickly.
Gee, my canopy never fogs. Maybe you were breathing heavily before the flight?
Ha ha ha.
> One thing I did notice was that when I throttled back to about 3500 rpm
> there was a bit of a droning. I could actually see it in the vertical card
> compass (vibrating). This sounds something like Wayne Beatty mentioned a
> while back. I'll have to ask Wayne if he solved that. My prop tracking is
> not as good as it could be so maybe that is the culprit.
I have noticed that the belt drive on the Stratus induces some vibration at
certain RPM's. By changing the belt tension I was able to change what frequency
the vibration occurs at, but never eliminate it (you definately don't want the
belt too tight since it will get tighter as the alum drive housing warms and
expands). Now I just avoid the frequency that causes it (many certified
engine/prop combos have rpms ranges to avoid due to vibration also). 3500rpm is
probably a good place for it - I doubt you'll spend a lot of time there.
-Bruce/601HD/Stratus/TDO/215 hrs
*************************
Bruce Bockius
Black Forest, CO, USA
elrond(at)xprt.net
http://www.xprt.net/~elrond
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Tunsley" <rtunsley(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Zenith-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 01/20/01 |
So the wing build is going well, but I'm a bit daunted about installing the
systems - pitot/static, electronics, and so on. Probably cause I've got no
instructions!! To start off with what should be an easy one, where should I
locate the strobe power packs; on the spar, on an internal rib, on the
inside of the tip rib?
Regards,
Roger Tunsley
CH601HDS
www.casterbridge.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh! |
It was the holidays that stopped me, still not back up to speed yet.
On these bearing materials, is it possible that a long wearing bearing
material would transfer the wear to the gear leg. I've used delrin on top of
the stock aluminum for the nose gear on my 701. I figured the extra bearing
area would help hold lube as well. But lube will hold sand and grit as
well. Seems to me there are a lot of trade offs running around here.
Richard
Fuselage safely mooved to the hanger, mark one jigs built, next step is
mounting the wings.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Brook <walruss(at)optushome.com.au>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 10:01 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
>
> being a materials engineer I went for a maaterial that is used in high
wear
> applications. I went for mining grade polyeurathane. I had the PEU bearing
> made for the landing gear. Ie the top bearing on my nose was used as the
> template about which the bearing material was cast. This stuff is used in
> extreme wear applications and does the job. If you've ever seen a one inch
> rock drill rod being bent like spaghetti and the polyeurathane bearings
are
> what stops it from breaking, you will know what I mean. It's not the
> lightest of materials but I know that it will never wear out in my plane.
>
> mike B. 2 701's simultaneous build, badly motivated at the moment but
> struggling on.477hrs and working on the forward fuses.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Scott Hogan
> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 5:40 PM
> To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
>
>
>
>
> UHMW-PE has is great bearing material, but as you've seen, it has a very
> high coefficient of thermal expansion. I'm not at work so I don't have
the
> numbers readily available. Usually when using UHMW as a bearing, it is
fit
> in some kind of metal housing. In your case, I'd guess that a .050" slop
> at room temperature wouldn't hurt anything. You'd have to work pretty
hard
> to get it any tighter than that anyway. I've not started construction on
> mine yet so I'm not sure exactly what the arrangement looks like - I'm
> assuming its just a tube going through a plate. I have read that the
factory
> design is aluminum on steel and wears fairly quickly. One other
> consideration is bearing thickness. 1/4" sounds a little thin, but again
> I'm mostly going on imagination. I intend to modify the design on my own
> when I get there.
>
> Scott Hogan - Just took the plunge 601-HDS
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 6:59 AM
> Subject: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
>
>
> >
> > Hello listers,
> >
> > I was making gear bearings with 1/4" UHMPWE material
> > this morning and I decided to do a temperature check.
> >
> > I made the bearing perfectly fit the landing gear tube
> > at room temperature and then, I took the plastic piece
> > outside the house. It is 5 degree F this morning
> > (-15C).
> >
> > When I took the bearing back inside, after a 10
> > minutes or so exposure to low temperature, it did not
> > fit the tube anymore! It is much much stiffer and
> > hard to move.
> >
> > Does anybody have recommendations? Observations?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Michel
> >
> >
> > =====
> > ----------------------------
> > Michel Therrien CH601-HD
> > http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
> > http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
> >
> > Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
> > http://auctions.yahoo.com/
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Zenith-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 01/20/01 |
I purchased a Whelen Strobe/nav light system. I did
not determined final placement for the power supply,
but a place that looks appealing to me is under the
seat, rear of the spar on the right side. I would
create an opening in the seat to facilitate the access
for maintenance. Anybody did that?
--- Roger Tunsley wrote:
>
>
> So the wing build is going well, but I'm a bit
> daunted about installing the
> systems - pitot/static, electronics, and so on.
> Probably cause I've got no
> instructions!! To start off with what should be an
> easy one, where should I
> locate the strobe power packs; on the spar, on an
> internal rib, on the
> inside of the tip rib?
> Regards,
> Roger Tunsley
> CH601HDS
> www.casterbridge.com
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Pelletier" <pelletie1(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I did it !!!!!!!! |
congratulations Bill for that great event and have fun;
Regards
Daniel Pelletier
601 HDS W/SOOB
>N812BM made it's first flight.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff & Marcia Davidson" <jdavidso(at)fcc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Zenith-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 01/20/01 |
Roger,
I am no expert, but I am facing the same systems questions. For the
nav/strobe lights on mine, I put an 8 foot conduit in the wing. You can use
other material, but I used 6061 half inch tube held in place by Adel clamps.
The clamps are fastened to the ribs with A6 (big to fill the hole) rivets.
I still have the option of putting a single power source at one end of one
side of the center wing section to power the strobes on both wingtips.
Another, and more expensive option, is to get 2 single power supplies for
the strobe and locate the supplies in the wing tip. This eliminates the
high voltage that may pass near to any leading edge fuel tanks you may have.
My understanding is that the power supplies have a definite shelf life so I
haven't purchased them yet and won't until I'm ready to use them.
You might also try to route the wires through the little open triangles in
the rib flange next to the spar. But this didn't work for me. Zenith
recommends using tywraps (2 turned 90 degrees) to hold a bundle of wires
with a 1/8 th hole in the ribs above the lightening hole.
I didn't buy Zenith's kit. For no really good reason (familiarity?), I
bought Whelan fixtures (nav/strobe for the wingtips and white light for the
rudder) and the Whelan installation kit. The installation kit comes with
insulated cable for the strobes.
The Zenith-list archives should have lots more, and maybe better,
information too. The ultimate answer to your question is up to you.
Jeff Davidson
CH 601 HD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pleasant Precision, Inc." <billn(at)ppiteam.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I did it !!!!!!!! |
Congrats, Bill.
Way to go; keep us posted.
>N812BM made it's first flight.
Bill Nichelson
Bellefontaine, Ohio USA
601HDS
S/N 6-3556 - N132BN
3300 Jabiru
Painting complete. Down to the long list of finishing touches.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carlos Sa <wings1(at)videotron.ca> |
| Subject: | mining grade polyeurathane? |
Michael Brook wrote:
>
>
> being a materials engineer I went for a maaterial that is used in high wear
> applications. I went for mining grade polyeurathane. I had the PEU bearing
> made for the landing gear.
Michael, where does one find this material?
Thanks in advance
Carlos
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Hogan" <shogan(at)alumni.washington.edu> |
| Subject: | UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh! |
Delrin (acetyl) is another good bearing material for this application. It
is harder than UHMW and has a slightly lower coefficient of friction against
steel. I wouldn't worry about trapped grit etc using either material. If
the strut tube is steel, it will last forever against either of those
materials. If you are still concerned about it, hard chrome plate your
strut tubes.
Scott Hogan - Just took the plunge 601-HDS
----- Original Message -----
From: "HOLCOMBE" <holcombe(at)oregonfast.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 6:34 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
>
> It was the holidays that stopped me, still not back up to speed yet.
> On these bearing materials, is it possible that a long wearing bearing
> material would transfer the wear to the gear leg. I've used delrin on top
of
> the stock aluminum for the nose gear on my 701. I figured the extra
bearing
> area would help hold lube as well. But lube will hold sand and grit as
> well. Seems to me there are a lot of trade offs running around here.
> Richard
> Fuselage safely mooved to the hanger, mark one jigs built, next step is
> mounting the wings.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Michael Brook <walruss(at)optushome.com.au>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 10:01 PM
> Subject: RE: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
>
>
>
> >
> > being a materials engineer I went for a maaterial that is used in high
> wear
> > applications. I went for mining grade polyeurathane. I had the PEU
bearing
> > made for the landing gear. Ie the top bearing on my nose was used as the
> > template about which the bearing material was cast. This stuff is used
in
> > extreme wear applications and does the job. If you've ever seen a one
inch
> > rock drill rod being bent like spaghetti and the polyeurathane bearings
> are
> > what stops it from breaking, you will know what I mean. It's not the
> > lightest of materials but I know that it will never wear out in my
plane.
> >
> > mike B. 2 701's simultaneous build, badly motivated at the moment but
> > struggling on.477hrs and working on the forward fuses.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Scott Hogan
> > Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 5:40 PM
> > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > UHMW-PE has is great bearing material, but as you've seen, it has a very
> > high coefficient of thermal expansion. I'm not at work so I don't have
> the
> > numbers readily available. Usually when using UHMW as a bearing, it is
> fit
> > in some kind of metal housing. In your case, I'd guess that a .050"
slop
> > at room temperature wouldn't hurt anything. You'd have to work pretty
> hard
> > to get it any tighter than that anyway. I've not started construction
on
> > mine yet so I'm not sure exactly what the arrangement looks like - I'm
> > assuming its just a tube going through a plate. I have read that the
> factory
> > design is aluminum on steel and wears fairly quickly. One other
> > consideration is bearing thickness. 1/4" sounds a little thin, but
again
> > I'm mostly going on imagination. I intend to modify the design on my
own
> > when I get there.
> >
> > Scott Hogan - Just took the plunge 601-HDS
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 6:59 AM
> > Subject: Zenith-List: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh!
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Hello listers,
> > >
> > > I was making gear bearings with 1/4" UHMPWE material
> > > this morning and I decided to do a temperature check.
> > >
> > > I made the bearing perfectly fit the landing gear tube
> > > at room temperature and then, I took the plastic piece
> > > outside the house. It is 5 degree F this morning
> > > (-15C).
> > >
> > > When I took the bearing back inside, after a 10
> > > minutes or so exposure to low temperature, it did not
> > > fit the tube anymore! It is much much stiffer and
> > > hard to move.
> > >
> > > Does anybody have recommendations? Observations?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Michel
> > >
> > >
> > > =====
> > > ----------------------------
> > > Michel Therrien CH601-HD
> > > http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
> > > http://www.pcperfect.com/mthobby/ch601
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
> > > http://auctions.yahoo.com/
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au> |
| Subject: | mining grade polyeurathane? |
that depends on where you are? I got the phone book and looked up
rubber/plastic manufacturer's and asked about mining grade polyeurathane. I
then took in the nose gear so that they could cast the plastic around the
top of the gear tube.
regards,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Carlos Sa
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 4:07 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: mining grade polyeurathane?
Michael Brook wrote:
>
>
> being a materials engineer I went for a maaterial that is used in high
wear
> applications. I went for mining grade polyeurathane. I had the PEU bearing
> made for the landing gear.
Michael, where does one find this material?
Thanks in advance
Carlos
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "P. Owens" <powens(at)inwave.com> |
| Subject: | Kit Planes on Discovery |
Dear Friends,
I was interested in this program also but it was not listed in my
area either, so I went to the web site and discovered the WINGS
DISCOVERY channel is DIGITAL ONLY! So I guess if we want to see it we
either have to get digital service or write a lot of letters to the
Discovery channel telling them we want to see it on the regular
channel. How about it guys, do we want to see the program on regular
tv? If so we need a write in campaign.
Phil Owens
CH-801 N84349 Builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PWalsh8045(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: UHMPWE landing gear bearings - huh! |
Keep it away from freezers and hair dryers!!!
...seriously....I simply followed the original plans...no plastic bearing
material...and so far after 200 hours off grass strip....very little
wear....if any......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kent Brown" <kbplanner(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I did it !!!!!!!! |
Congrats, Bill!
Kent
Someday.......
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 1:52 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: I did it !!!!!!!!
>
> N812BM made it's first flight.
>
> What a rush. The climb performance is outstanding. I came off the runway
so
> quickly that Carol missed getting a photo (plus she was freezing).
>
> The outside air temperature was 15 deg/F. The canopy did fog up some when
I
> first got in but turning on my exhaust fan (thanks Mike Fothergill for the
> idea) cleared the canopy up rather quickly.
>
> I climbed above the airport to about 4000 feet (airport is at 238 ft.) and
> checked out the feel. Had a slight turn to the left which the airleron
trim
> took out. Just need to tweak the ailerons a bit. The elevator trim
remained
> at neutral and was fine.
>
> I made only one approach and landed. Greased it right in and had no
handling
> trouble on the runway which is 3000 feet and covered with a thin layer of
> snow and ice. Prior to takeoff I had done a high speed taxi run and tried
> swerving a bit to see how she handled on the snow and ice and there was no
> tendency to do anything strange.
>
> I only mad the one flight but now that it is out of the way, I'll be
making
> a lot more as soon as possible.
>
> I won't give any speed numbers as I was to excited to pay attention to the
> GPS. I'll post some additional information as the flights progress.
>
> One thing I did notice was that when I throttled back to about 3500 rpm
> there was a bit of a droning. I could actually see it in the vertical card
> compass (vibrating). This sounds something like Wayne Beatty mentioned a
> while back. I'll have to ask Wayne if he solved that. My prop tracking is
> not as good as it could be so maybe that is the culprit.
>
> One other item worth mentioning. I took a small micro cassette recorder
and
> connected it's MIC IN to the passenger side HEADPHONE jack. This gave me a
> cockpit voice recorder that works rather well. The recorder I have is a
> voice actuated type and every time I make a comment on the intercom or
> radio, the recorder turns on and records it. This I feel makes the flight
> test process a lot easier than trying to write everything down (especially
> since I am right handed and that hand is rather busy flying). The
resulting
> recording is a bit noisy due to all of the cockpit noise but is certainly
> useable for transcribing the data after the flight.
>
> Anyway, I am back home now and trying to calm down.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Vermont - HDS - Stratus - Warp Drive - N812BM - Tri Gear - Full
> instruments - LE and header tanks - Wheel pants - No paint
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kent Brown" <kbplanner(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Zenith-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 01/20/01 |
Roger,
FWIW, I installed the Aeroflash strobes and lights. This involves two power
supplies which I mounted to the front of the spar web near the tips. Wiring
was run through grommets installed in the ribs, with additional support
provided by Adel clamps attached to mounts on the upper skin "L" stiffeners.
I kept the wires close behind the main spar, and ran them through a piece of
nylon tubing where they go through the baggage locker for extra protection
there. The nylon tubing was mounted to cable tie mounts epoxied to the spar
web to keep the wiring out of the way in the locker.
I dithered over this quite a while, too!
Kent
HDS - Rudder and one wing done. Currently dithering over a landing light
installation in the second wing.
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Tunsley <rtunsley(at)ix.netcom.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 5:31 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Zenith-List Digest: 6 Msgs - 01/20/01
>
> So the wing build is going well, but I'm a bit daunted about installing
the
> systems - pitot/static, electronics, and so on. Probably cause I've got no
> instructions!! To start off with what should be an easy one, where should
December 30, 2000 - January 22, 2001
Zenith-Archive.digest.vol-ca