Zenith-List Archive Browser

Zenith-Archive.digest.vol-cx
May 31, 2002 - June 25, 2002

I was reminded of the need for a very careful 'spring' walkaround today. When I went out to the garage to work on my Zodiac, I discovered that a chipmunk had found a way into the garage and had been storing/eating sunflower seeds in my carburettor air filter inlet!!! I was able to carefully vacuum this all out and I have a cloth stuffed into there tonight. (I've also left the carb heat valve ON as this blocks the normal air inlet) With aircraft having been sitting around the airport, hangars, garages, etc. for the winter, remember to check EVERYWHERE for mice, birdnests, bees and wasps, etc. etc. etc... IT'S A JUNGLE OUT THERE! ;-) -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "barry mayne" <bazmay(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: What went wrong?!
Date: May 31, 2002
G'day Phil, Just a thought about where to place the turnbuckle from the lower end of the control stick. I placed mine at the top on the elevator underneath the turtleneck. Makes it so easy to get at to adjust the tension. The other cable has the turnbuckle at the control stick end because it is on the top ( the other end is under the elevator ). Cheers Barry Mayne HDS Jabiru 3300 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Raker" <phadr1(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: What went wrong?! > >You might also want to make your turnbuckles a bit smaller than > what's in the plans; especially the one at the bottom of the stick. > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "patrick walsh" <pwalsh4539(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Careful Walkaround!
Date: May 30, 2002
yep, Grant, you are absolutely right! Last year I discovered wasps in the rear fuselage...wouldnt have caused any problem unless they decided to come on through the seat back and greet the pilot in flight. It really does pay to give it a thorough walk-around.....EVERY TIME!! Patrick Walsh 601 HD/912 ----- Original Message ----- From: Grant Corriveau Subject: Zenith-List: Careful Walkaround! I was reminded of the need for a very careful 'spring' walkaround today. When I went out to the garage to work on my Zodiac, I discovered that a chipmunk had found a way into the garage and had been storing/eating sunflower seeds in my carburettor air filter inlet!!! I was able to carefully vacuum this all out and I have a cloth stuffed into there tonight. (I've also left the carb heat valve ON as this blocks the normal air inlet) With aircraft having been sitting around the airport, hangars, garages, etc. for the winter, remember to check EVERYWHERE for mice, birdnests, bees and wasps, etc. etc. etc... IT'S A JUNGLE OUT THERE! ;-) -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca = = = = Get mor ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 30, 2002
From: Phil Raker <phadr1(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: What went wrong?!
Good idea, Barry! I wish I'd thought of it. Too late now for this go-'round, but if I ever have to re do it.... Thanx, again, for the good idea. Phil Raker - N556P: HDS/Stratus; building flaperon mechanism --- barry mayne wrote: > > G'day Phil, > Just a thought about where to place the turnbuckle from the lower end of the > control stick. I placed mine at the top on the elevator underneath the > turtleneck. Makes it so easy to get at to adjust the tension. The other > cable has the turnbuckle at the control stick end because it is on the top > ( the other end is under the elevator ). > > Cheers > Barry Mayne HDS Jabiru 3300 http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)thegateway.net>
Subject: Re: Careful Walkaround!
Date: May 30, 2002
We have mud daubers (a kind of wasp) that build nests of mud which could get very heavy and be hard to get out of a wing (they can and do get in close places like a wing openings). Question: would bug spray react with the aluminum if I sprayed inside my wing, tail, fuse? Chuck D. Texas > > and greet the pilot in flight. > > It really does pay to give it a thorough walk-around.....EVERY TIME!! > > I have yet to fly but have already found a black widow spider making a home > in my rear fuslage. Gotta love all the nasties in the great Arizona desert. > In the sumertime I now bug bomb my hangar once a month. I HATE spiders1, and > the blind poisonous kind are especially troubling. > > Steve > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 30, 2002
From: "Darryl West (Home)" <rdwest(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Time to replace my muffler...
My 1993 Zenair-built mild steel dual-inlet mufflers (with straight-down outlets) are falling apart on my CH601-HD. They wobble side-to side by 2 inches and are cracking my cowling. The heat shields fell off years ago. Poor design IMHO. I guess it is time to replace them, preferably with stainless steel. Flypass (Zenith) is now only supplying a 4-inlet muffler (designed for the XL, I think), but the XL cowling and mount look different than the old HD, and I am worried it won't fit (I'm not reassured by their claims that it will fit). They also don't seem to know if it is stainless or not! Anybody been there / done that / got advice? Thanks. Darryl rdwest(at)shaw.ca http://members.shaw.ca/rdwest/index.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "michael brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au>
Subject: First Flight
Date: May 31, 2002
I flew my bird for the first time this afternoon for about a half an hour. What a rush... Photos will be sent to photoshare shortly ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 31, 2002
Subject: [ Michael Brooks ] : New Email List Photo Share Available!
From: Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com>
A new Email List Photo Share is available: Poster: Michael Brooks Subject: Michael Brooks Zenith Stol CH 701 http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/walruss@optushome.com.au.05.31.2002/index.html -------------------------------------------- o EMAIL LIST PHOTO SHARE Share your files and photos with other List members simply by emailing the files to: pictures(at)matronics.com Please view the typical Share above and include the Description Text Fields as shown along with your submission of files and photos. o Main Photo Share Index: http://www.matronics.com/photoshare -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Ward" <adwsail(at)bigfoot.com>
Date: May 31, 2002
Subject: Local Builders
Are there any 601 or 701 builders in the Tampa Bay area? I would love to meet any and lend a hand if desired in exchange for information while I save up for mine.Dale Ward WB4LIP Wooden Boat Cold Molding and Restoration Marine Electronic Systems Design adwsail(at)bigfoot.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kilby, Roger" <Roger.Kilby(at)DynCorp.com>
Subject: N602GS First Flight
Date: May 31, 2002
Grant, Congratulations!!! Roger Kilby N98RK 601HDS ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 31, 2002
From: "JNBOLDING1" <JNBOLDING1(at)mail.ev1.net>
Subject: Re: Paint
---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "John Birgiolas" <johnbirgiolas(at)hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 19:28:32 -0400 > >I have to start thinking about painting the 701. I have used zinc >chromate in the flying surfaces and marhyde in the fuselage. The >exterior of the aircraft is not prepared in any way. Any suggestions on >paints that can be applied by me in a home made garage paintbooth? >There are all sorts of suggestions in the archives and I would be >particularly interested in what to avoid. Thanks in advance.. > John Birgiolas > > >Having made my living for 35 yrs selling paint booths I will offer the following advise concerning homemade ones. Please don't misunderstand as I too have made them to paint aircraft projects but just like experimental aircraft, the potential for disaster is there if not done properly. I have inspected 3 homemade booths in the last 3 decades that exploded due to the right mix of vapor being drawn over, across or thru an open type motor . Totally enclosed and explosion proof motors while safer are not allowed in ithe airstream either as case temps can cause ignition under the right circumstances. Engineered booths have the motor completly outside the airstream and have nonsparking blades. The SAFEST way to build a booth for one time use is to have the fan blow fresh air INTO the booth and let it exhaust naturally thru an opening in the other end. Keep ALL lights and any spark producing equipment outside . Lights generally operate above the flash point of most coatings. Be very concerned about respirators as inside the booth will probably have a very high concentration of vapors as most one time booths are under exhausted. Example: Booths for painting cars exhaust 14,000 cubic feet per MIN. changing the air inside the booth every 15 seconds. Have fun ! John ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: May 31, 2002
Subject: Intercom Advice
Hi List, Can anyone recommend an intercom that they are currently using in their Zodies? Looking for 2 place, low cost with performance. I am using an ICOM radio that has a built in intercom, but you are forced to use a PTT instead of always open or voice actuated. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Steve ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pinneo, George" <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com>
Subject: Careful Walkaround!
Date: May 31, 2002
I used a urethane to close almost all the potential entry points for mud daubers etc. This approach at least minimizes the risk. GGP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pinneo, George" <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com>
Subject: Time to replace my muffler...
Date: May 31, 2002
I have the '94 version of the dual mufflers for a 912. Custom Aircraft in El Cajon will make custom 321 SS mufflers for you. Mine are still ugly but fine; the insides did rust out; I cut them open and have been operating them that way for several years now. GGP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick" <rwripper(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: Engine Prop question
Date: May 31, 2002
I have a Hershey-bar winged, 601 HD with a Contential 85 and a 72x42 wood prop. Unfortunately my best cruise at 2450 is a disappointing 85 mph. Would sure appreciate hearing from similarly equipped people how they are fairing cruise-wise. Thanks, Dick ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Statrus oil filter source
Date: May 31, 2002
Did anyone ever come up with a source for the Stratus oil filters? I'm 12 hrs from my first oil change. Philip A. Polstra Certified Flight Instructor - Airplane Single Engine; Instrument Airplane Ground Instructor - Advanced; Instrument NAFI Instructor http://www.philsflying.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "tongaloa" <tongaloa(at)alltel.net>
Subject: 701 noise
Date: May 31, 2002
Has anyone measured noise level in their 701? If so, please let me know numbers and how you're set up. Engine, prop, windows? doors? Also interested in subjective opinions relative to Cessna 152, 172, arrow, AA5 Thanks, Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RoyN9869L(at)aol.com
Date: May 31, 2002
Subject: Re: Intercom Advice
Hi Steve, Boy oh boy I might be the guy that makes your day. While I am building a CH-701 I fly a two place Grumman American Yankee AA1B. I have recently upgraded the radios and sold all the equipment associated with the old radio package, this all except the Sigtronics SPA-400 intercom. Look it up in Aircraft Spruce catalog or Gulf Coast or Tropic and see if that is what you want. This unit will handle up to 4 places. In the bag is an installation and Operating Instructions Sheet the unit itself a color coded harness, Mike and headphone jacks for two positions. It was only used one year after I had it installed, It still looks like I just took it out of the factory carton. If this is what you want make me an offer. I paid $189.95 a year ago plus installation in a certified aircraft. You could probably install this in a couple of hours. Anyway let me know. Regards, Roger Roy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: May 31, 2002
Subject: Re: Intercom Advice
Hi Roger, Would $75.00 dollars be too low of an offer? If it is, let me know what would be more fair. Thanks for responding to my posting, it very well might be my lucky day! Thanks, Steve Freeman 480-494-1993 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RoyN9869L(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 01, 2002
Subject: Re: Intercom Advice
Steve, These units in TAP used sell for 100.00 to 150,00 I'll let it go for 125.00 plus shipping, or 140.00 and I'll cover the shipping and Insurance. It will come to you with a money back guarantee if it is not what I have described less shipping cost. Cheers Roger ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "The Meiste's" <meiste(at)essex1.com>
Subject: Re: Careful Walkaround!
Date: Jun 01, 2002
What about them drain holes? I'm sure they would make a perfect entry for a nest. Kelly > I used a urethane to close almost all the potential entry points for mud daubers etc ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Damien Graham" <dgraham7(at)twcny.rr.com>
Subject: Aileron
Date: Jun 01, 2002
Group: Well, I was going to take my 601 HD to the airport today. We loaded the wings onto a wooden platform that fits on my truck, then we walked back into the barn. As we were standing there talking, I saw the top wing go flying off the truck. These wings want to FLY !!. I should have tied down the wings immediately. The damage was not as bad as it could have been. There is just some damage to the aileron. It will probably be easier to replace the aileron rather than try to fix it. Does anyone have a 601 HD aileron that they want to part with? Regards, Damien ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff & Marcia Davidson" <jdavidso(at)fcc.net>
Subject: Re: Aileron
Date: Jun 01, 2002
I recent heard Chris Heintz say at Sun-n-Fun that he lost a whole wing trying to carry it himself. It flew away on him!! Jeff Davidson As we were standing there talking, I saw the top wing go > flying off the truck. These wings want to FLY !!. I should have tied > down the wings immediately. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Stratus - Cracks 'R' Us
Well, I was fitting my repaired alternator bracket and I found another cracked component. One of the engine mounting brackets. Go to my web site (see below), click CONSTRUCTION and then ENGINE MOUNT CRACK to read details and see photos. Getting a bit depressed!!!!!! Regards, Bill (N812BM - HDS - Tri - Stratus - Vermont - 138.0 flight hrs. - 212 landings) web site -> http://homepages.together.net/~billvt/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
Subject: Re: Stratus - Cracks 'R' Us
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
on 02/06/02 00:56, Bill Morelli at billvt(at)together.net wrote: ... > Getting a bit depressed!!!!!! Better than getting a bit dead - at least that's some consolation!! ;-) Thanks for posting the photos - These are the kinds of things that I don't have much experience in spotting, so now I'll now a little more what to look for in my own inspections. I also thank you for the TAS calculator and the idea of using an audio tape recorder to document test flights. Now that I've got my intercom installed, this will be easy enough to implement. Safe Flying! -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Don Gordon" <dojo(at)polymembranepipe.com.au>
Subject: engine
Date: Jun 02, 2002
Hi just a simple question I'm not read for the engine yet but I am looking at the 914 as an option for the engine in my 701 115 HP is there any down falls in this engine or in using this engine in the 701 interested in any responses thanks Don ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Danielson" <steved(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: engine
Date: Jun 02, 2002
There is at least one guy that has done it already, you can see it here: http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/7-914.html Maybe that will give you a starting point. Steve > > Hi > just a simple question I'm not read for the engine yet > but I am looking at the 914 as an option for the engine in my > 701 > 115 HP > is there any down falls in this engine or in using this engine in > the 701 > interested in any responses thanks > Don > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Subject: ZnCr vs. MarHyde
Date: Jun 02, 2002
For those of you who have used both ZnCr and MarHyde for corrosion proofing... I've been using ZnCr between parts that are riveted together, but now I'm about to rivet the denter wing to the rear and forward fuselages. I plan to MarHyde the interior surfaces of the center wing/forward fuse, and am wondering whether to use the MarHyde between parts I'd normally ZnCr. Or should I use ZnCr, wipe away the parts that show, and then MarHyde the parts? Thanks for any help. Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: Collins <collins(at)pali.com>
Subject: Re: Stratus - Cracks 'R' Us
Hi Bill, Was the engine mount powder coated? Bob Collins Sunnyvale CA USA Bill Morelli wrote: > > > Well, I was fitting my repaired alternator bracket and I found another > cracked component. One of the engine mounting brackets. > > Go to my web site (see below), click CONSTRUCTION and then ENGINE MOUNT > CRACK to read details and see photos. > > Getting a bit depressed!!!!!! > > Regards, > Bill (N812BM - HDS - Tri - Stratus - Vermont - 138.0 flight hrs. - 212 > landings) > web site -> http://homepages.together.net/~billvt/ > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dirk Andrepont" <dandrepont(at)charter.net>
Subject: Pneumatic Drill
Date: Jun 02, 2002
List I am about to purchase a pneumatic drill...considering the ones at Harbor Freight & have looked at the Cleaveland Tools catalog ....any recommendations/warnings are appreciated since there are such big price differences. Thanks Dirk ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Pneumatic Drill
Date: Jun 02, 2002
I bought two of the cheap ones. They worked fine for me. I don't think there is much different in drills, unlike impact wrenches. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dirk Andrepont" <dandrepont(at)charter.net> Subject: Zenith-List: Pneumatic Drill > > List > > I am about to purchase a pneumatic drill...considering the ones at > Harbor Freight & have looked at the Cleaveland Tools catalog ....any > recommendations/warnings are appreciated since there are such big price > differences. > > Thanks > > Dirk > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Re: Stratus - Cracks 'R' Us
Yes, the mount was power coated. As a matter of fact, today I removed the mount from the engine. I was able to do that by placing a jack under the engine to support it's weight and then removed the mount. Was rather easy. I also inspected all of the steel parts again today with a strong flash light to see if I could find any additional cracks. I found none. The powder coating on this mount is very thick, almost like a plastic coating. Difficult to get off. I am in the process of cleaning it up so I can take photos of the crack on the bare steel. I will post those to my web site later today and let you know when they are ready to view. I showed the cracked mount to my local A&P and he said it should not be a problem welding it. I'll have that done tomorrow. He suggested I get it repaired and then keep a close eye on it. If it starts to crack again, he suspects there is some unusual load on that mount that would need to be fixed (if I could figure out what that is!). I am also going to forward the photos to Mykal and I expect he will send a new mount as well. An additional note on my previous posts regarding the Alternator mount cracks. It appears that the Alt mount was changed from .120" material to .0185" material at some point. Another builder (Paul H.) received his engine in Sept 99 and he has the thicker Alt mount which is painted gold by the way. I received my engine in May of 98. and it has the thinner .120" mount painted (powder coated) blue. So sometime between those two dates, the mount was updated. Regards, Bill >Was the engine mount powder coated? > >Bob Collins >Sunnyvale CA USA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Frisby" <marslander(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pneumatic Drill
Date: Jun 02, 2002
Dirk, I've had very good luck getting used surplus ones by bidding on ebay. These are usually ones from manufacturers that are downsizing, and are professional quality tools. I got a nice (not nice looking) high speed 1/4 inch pistol drill for $35, and a 45 degree close quarter drill for $85. Take a look. Jim Frisby >From: "Dirk Andrepont" <dandrepont(at)charter.net> >Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: Zenith-List: Pneumatic Drill >Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2002 12:43:23 -0500 > > > >List > >I am about to purchase a pneumatic drill...considering the ones at >Harbor Freight & have looked at the Cleaveland Tools catalog ....any >recommendations/warnings are appreciated since there are such big price >differences. > >Thanks > >Dirk > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Phil & Michele Miller <millerpg(at)ps.gen.nz>
Subject: engine
Date: Jun 03, 2002
but I am looking at the 914 as an option for the engine in my 701 The 701 was originally designed around the 503 Rotax. I'm sure you will find it is "airframe limited" at around 65-70hp in terms of top speed. Mine has a 912S which I believe is already overkill. Do you really want the added complexity and cost of a turbo for little, if any, effective gain? Unless you operate regularly at high density altitude, save your money. 80hp is fine, 100hp is plenty. Regards, Phil Miller (701 with 912ULS) New Zealand -----Original Message----- From: Don Gordon [SMTP:dojo(at)polymembranepipe.com.au] Subject: Zenith-List: engine Hi just a simple question I'm not read for the engine yet but I am looking at the 914 as an option for the engine in my 701 115 HP is there any down falls in this engine or in using this engine in the 701 interested in any responses thanks Don ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: rear fuse wiring runs
I have a question that is common to the 701 and 801, and probably the 601 as well. I need to run wires from the cabin through the rear fuse to the tail. (Tail light wires, antenna wires part of the way, etc.) The rear fuse has L stiffeners perpendicular to the skin on all four sides at several places along the length of the fuse. Has anyone come up with a clever (light, cheap, easy installation) way to run the wires through a conduit of some sort and mount it securely along the way? Thanks, Gary Liming ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "michael brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au>
Subject: Re: engine
Date: Jun 03, 2002
This motor is good in the 701. The extra horse power make her rock and roll like you would not believe. However the feul consumption is substantially higher than a 912 or 912s. So while it is very good for climb and stol you need to seriously consider range. mike2planes ----- Original Message ----- From: Don Gordon <dojo(at)polymembranepipe.com.au> Subject: Zenith-List: engine > > Hi > just a simple question I'm not read for the engine yet > but I am looking at the 914 as an option for the engine in my > 701 > 115 HP > is there any down falls in this engine or in using this engine in > the 701 > interested in any responses thanks > Don > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Townsend" <601xl(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Drill
Date: Jun 01, 2002
Hi builders I have been using a 12 volt drill to make my plane so far, but I find I'm spending a large amount of time de-burring. Would a pneumatic drill be a better tool to use? Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: Lowell Metz <lowellmetz(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Drill
> >Hi builders > >I have been using a 12 volt drill to make my plane so far, but I find I'm IMO Mark, it doesn't matter which drill motor you use , the results of the hole will be the same. It is more economical to use the 12 vdc motor as much as you can as converting electricity to compressed air , then drive a drill motor is not very efficient but the air drills are usually a higher RPM and may be a little easier to control. I used both but used the cordless electric about 80% of the time. I also got some nice thick skin on my thumb and index finger from rotating a bigger drill during the debur operation. Just part of the process. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: Lowell Metz <lowellmetz(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: rear fuse wiring runs
> > >I have a question that is common to the 701 and 801, and probably the 601 >as well. > >I need to run wires from the cabin through the rear fuse to the >fuse has L stiffeners perpendicular to the skin on all four sides at >several places along the length of the fuse. I drilled a 5/32 hole in the "L" , cut a short piece of 1/4 clear fuel line ( about 3/8 long) , then ran a tie wrap through the "L" hole , up through the fuel line, around the wire bundle, back through the fuel line, and through the tie wrap catch. It makes a strong stand-off and is used a lot in the U/L's. Have never had one fail and they are cheap and neat. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: "J. Davis" <jd(at)lri.sjhc.london.on.ca>
Subject: engine
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Phil & Michele Miller wrote: > > but I am looking at the 914 as an option for the engine in my > 701 > > The 701 was originally designed around the 503 Rotax. I'm sure you will > find it is "airframe limited" at around 65-70hp in terms of top speed. Mine > has a 912S which I believe is already overkill. Do you really want the > added complexity and cost of a turbo for little, if any, effective gain? > Unless you operate regularly at high density altitude, save your money. > 80hp is fine, 100hp is plenty. > Amen! My question is ***WHY*** ?? Not to mention that the engine alone costs more then my total flying 701! IMHO, 80 hp is overkill. For years, the 582 was considered the way to go to 'hot rod' a 701. Nearly a 1:1 hp/weight ratio! Why anyone would choose anything else is beyond me, given the nature of the design and its intended use. Would you drop a corvette engine into a jeep? This is a *draggy* airplane, folks. 115 hp in a Sonex will go 180 mph. Vne on a 701 is 110... think about it. -- Regards, J. flying: Zenair STOL CH701/582 C-IGGY , >170 hrs. building: Sonex #325, engine undecided, probably Jabiru 3300/6/120hp | J. Davis, M.Sc. (comp_sci) | email: jd(at)uwo.ca | | SysMgr, research programmer | voice: (519) 646 6100 x64166 | | Lawson Research Institute | fax: (519) 646 6135 | | London, Ontario | lriweb.sjhc.london.on.ca/~jd | We cannot change the direction of the wind... but we can adjust our sails. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 02, 2002
Subject: Subaru Cowl, lower bowl
Hi List, It's time for me to start fitting the lower bowl of my cowl on my 601HDS Subaru. Can anyone provide details on how they attached the cheeks after cutting out the holes for the valve covers? I know I could glass them on, but I;ve never done galss work, I also know I could rivet them on, but that might now look great, I'm wondering if the rivets with some bondo type material might work. Any advice is apprciated. Thanks, Steve ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 02, 2002
Subject: Re: rear fuse wiring runs
In a message dated 6/2/02 1:37:11 PM US Mountain Standard Time, gary(at)liming.org writes: > Has anyone come up with a clever (light, cheap, easy installation) way to > run the wires through a conduit of some sort and mount it securely along > the way? I don't know about clever, but I took some light PVC pipe and secured it to the floor of the rear fusealge with Hand bent angles of .025 materail that I riveted to the floor and then drilled right into the PVC pipe and rivetd it. It won't move and the wires run through that channel. Works great, maybe a couple of pounds all together. Steve ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: "Darryl West (Home)" <rdwest(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: rear fuse wiring runs
No conduit in mine, just silicone dabs to side of fuselage along main longeron. Darryl rdwest(at)shaw.ca http://members.shaw.ca/rdwest/index.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Stratus Engine Mount Crack Update
I have added three pictures to my web site that show the engine mount crack with the powder coat removed. (go to web site below and click CONSTRUCTION and then ENGINE MOUNT CRACK). The powder coat is not easy to get off!!! To remove the engine mount just required placing a jack under the engine to support it's weight while the mount is off. I searched the Zenith list archives and came across a post by Don W. earlier this year about what sounds to be the same crack on the same motor mount that I just discovered. Regards, Bill (N812BM - HDS - Tri - Stratus - Vermont - 138.0 flight hrs. - 212 landings) web site -> http://homepages.together.net/~billvt/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Subaru Cowl, lower bowl
Date: Jun 02, 2002
First off, ignore the marks Zenith made on the cowl! That cost me lots of time and the price of a new cowling. I glassed mine. Like you, I knew nothing about fiberglass, but I ran into a friend at the office who did. We did it "right" by cutting out the holes, then glassing in the cheeks with fiberglass cloth and expoxy. I tried to use bondo on the first one, and it really didn't work well. I riveted the cheeks in place before trying to fill it in with bondo, looked aweful. Look to your local EAA chapter for some fiberglass expertise. ----- Original Message ----- From: <STEFREE(at)aol.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Subaru Cowl, lower bowl > > Hi List, > > It's time for me to start fitting the lower bowl of my cowl on my 601HDS > Subaru. Can anyone provide details on how they attached the cheeks after > cutting out the holes for the valve covers? I know I could glass them on, > but I;ve never done galss work, I also know I could rivet them on, but that > might now look great, I'm wondering if the rivets with some bondo type > material might work. > > Any advice is apprciated. > > Thanks, > > Steve > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 02, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: rear fuse wiring runs
I guess the way I did it is neither cheap, clever nor light (I used a lot of MS21919), but it is described here: http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/chelectrik.htm Michel --- Gary Liming wrote: >... several places along the length of the fuse. > > Has anyone come up with a clever (light, cheap, easy > installation) way to > run the wires through a conduit of some sort and > mount it securely along > the way? ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Tanner" <vk3auu(at)vic.australis.com.au>
Subject: Re: engine
Date: Jun 03, 2002
What you are saying would be entirely correct for the original design, but it has now been increased to 1100 lbs gross design MTOW, so of course, those who would have been happy flying the original at 1100 lbs will now fly the updated version at 1200 lbs. Having said that, mine (an original) flys quite comfortably at 1100 lbs with 80 HP 912UL on a fine day with nothing else to overstress it, but if you want to go heavier with the updated design, then the extra 20 HP of the 912S might come in handy. So it isn't just speed that determines the HP requirements. I don't know how many 503 powered versions have been built, but my guess is that most pilots would have found their performance pretty ordinary at gross. The 80 HP also puts the cruise speed very close to Maximum maneuvering speed too, a point which seems to be overlooked by most people. 1000 feet per minute climb, 70 knots at 5000 rpm and 16 litres per hour cruise isn't too bad and when you also consider that power requirement (and therefore fuel usage) goes up in proportion to the speed cubed, you will pay pretty dearly for faster cruise with more horsepower. David Tanner CH701 (1799) 912UL > > The 701 was originally designed around the 503 Rotax. > Amen! My question is ***WHY*** J. Davis, M.Sc. (comp_sci) | email: jd(at)uwo.ca | ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Tanner" <vk3auu(at)vic.australis.com.au>
Subject: Removing powder coating
Date: Jun 03, 2002
If you want to rmove powder coating, try an angle grinder with a wire brush attachment, instead of a grinding disk. David Tanner ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Brigman" <jbrigman(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: pneumatic drills
Date: Jun 03, 2002
> > I am about to purchase a pneumatic drill...considering the ones at > Harbor Freight & have looked at the Cleaveland Tools catalog ....any > recommendations/warnings are appreciated since there are such big price > differences. Dirk; I have the el-cheapo harbor freight drill and it's way better than any electric drill I own. The bearings in pneumatic drills are usually roller bearings and do a far better job than the really crappy sleeve bearings in cordless (and most corded) drills. I get far more accurate control and lesser burrs with the pneumatic drill than the electrics. But I have to wear hearing protection when I use my pneumatic drill. The el-cheapo pneumatic drills make a lot more noise than the more expensive ones and take a lot more air. If you plan to use the el-cheapo pneumatic drill, then buy a bigger compressor. Mine's a 6hp/30gal oilless "last year's unit" I picked up at Lowes for about $250. It's a vertical unit. If I were doing it over, I'd go with a horizontal one: the vertical units want to tip over too easy. I've used nice air drills and they are worth the extra $$: they are much quieter, higher rpm and use less air. I hope to get one soon, just don't know which one to get, I'd like to HEAR them before I buy...:-) To lessen burrs, take it a tad bit slower and let the drill bit do the work. Good luck! JKB ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Simle" <bob(at)eeworks.com>
Subject: Zinc oxide adhesion
Date: Jun 03, 2002
After applying zinc oxide to various fuselage components I noticed it doesn't take much effort at all to scratch it off with a finger nail. Is this normal? I prep the metal by first scuffing it up with a green scrub pad and then clean it with acetone. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 03, 2002
From: John Thompson <rcav8r(at)chorus.net>
Subject: Rotax 914 in 701
the Vne may be 110mph, but has anyone actually reached this in level or even slightly descending flight? From what I've read, most 701's go about 70-80mph. I'm leaning towards a 912S myself, because I'm a big fella wieght wise, and would like to have the option of having amphib floats with a passenger and some gear in the future. Make the gross 1232#....:) John ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Birgiolas" <johnbirgiolas(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: pneumatic drill
Date: Jun 03, 2002
I too purchased a pneumatic drill but found the practicality of the 14volt much better. Its a problem dragging the air hose around, and the compressor grates on the nerves after a while. Now I use the battery job exclusively. John Birgiolas ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: Zinc oxide adhesion
Date: Jun 03, 2002
Bob, I used zinc oxide on my rudder long time ago, and before it was done, I removed it all by wiping it off and zinc chromating it. Was never happy about the non-sticking zinc oxide. Larry McFarland - 601hds @ macsmachine.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Simle" <bob(at)eeworks.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Zinc oxide adhesion > > After applying zinc oxide to various fuselage components I noticed it > doesn't take much effort at all to scratch it off with a finger nail. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed & Jan Kramer" <edkramer(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: CH 701 w/912 ULS
Date: Jun 03, 2002
I am in the process of building a 701 and I am looking at the 912 ULS for the power plant. Have any of you had any experience with this engine? Does anyone have any performance data that you would be willing to share? Ed Kramer West Seneca, NY CH 701 edkramer(at)prodigy.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 03, 2002
From: Steven Kay <skay(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: CH 701 w/912 ULS
My understanding is that it is the same as the certified 912S, 100HP, but not certified. The engines list is probably a better place to ask. -Steve Ed & Jan Kramer wrote: > > I am in the process of building a 701 and I am looking at the 912 ULS > for the power plant. Have any of you had any experience with this > engine? Does anyone have any performance data that you would be willing > to share? > Ed Kramer > West Seneca, NY > CH 701 > edkramer(at)prodigy.net > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Weston, Jim" <Jim.Weston(at)delta.com>
Subject: Statrus oil filter source
Date: Jun 03, 2002
I haven't tried installing it on the plane yet, but I bought a Briggs & Stratton oil filter that measures to be a perfect match. I have it in hand now and it matches the measurements that I took from my old Wix filter. The part number is No. 5049. Guess where I bought it?......That's right, where America shops, Wal-Mart. Jim Weston McDonough, Ga. -----Original Message----- From: Philip Polstra [mailto:ppolstra(at)mindspring.com] Subject: Zenith-List: Statrus oil filter source Did anyone ever come up with a source for the Stratus oil filters? I'm 12 hrs from my first oil change. Philip A. Polstra Certified Flight Instructor - Airplane Single Engine; Instrument Airplane Ground Instructor - Advanced; Instrument NAFI Instructor http://www.philsflying.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Beven Dryden" <dcff(at)powerup.com.au>
Subject: Re: Removing powder coating
Date: Jun 04, 2002
Normal paint stripper (Dichloromethane Based) will remove powder coating without any abrasive damage. It may take a couple of applications but it will work. I have used this a couple of times where for I powder coat the gear struts and then had to remove the powder coating where they slide through the bearing plates (601HD). Beven Dryden = = > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "michael brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au>
Subject: Re: CH 701 w/912 ULS
Date: Jun 04, 2002
I've flown a 701 with the 912S engine in it and the 912. You get better performance out of the 912s in the stol envelope but with a feul burn penalty. A couple of guys who I've talked to who have them said that the extra feul burn isn't worth it but the perfomance is that much better. If you can afford it I would get a 912s but make sure you have the large wing tanks with header tank for the extra feul. If feul is an issue I would go for the 912 because the perfomance is still pretty spectacular. mike2planes 1 flying still finishing the other one. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ed & Jan Kramer <edkramer(at)prodigy.net> Subject: Zenith-List: CH 701 w/912 ULS > > I am in the process of building a 701 and I am looking at the 912 ULS > for the power plant. Have any of you had any experience with this > engine? Does anyone have any performance data that you would be willing > to share? > Ed Kramer > West Seneca, NY > CH 701 > edkramer(at)prodigy.net > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 03, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Correction on Stratus Alternator Mount
I had made a statement earlier (yesterday I think) that I thought if the alternator mount on the Stratus is gold color that it would be the newer .185" thick version. Well, today I received my new Alternator mount from Stratus and it is the .185" version but it is blue powder coated!!! So the bottom line is, you apparently only can tell if you have the new thicker mount by measuring. Don't go by the color. By the way, Mykal shipped the new alternator mount the same day he received my e-mail that mine had failed. I e-mailed him last night about my engine mount crack and he shipped one of those out today. Regards, Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 03, 2002
Subject: Follow up lower bowl, Subaru EA-81
Hi List, Thanks for the recent advioce on the bottom cowling. I ma in the process of making the cuts for the cheeks and I hope this is not my dumb question for the day, but here goes...... After the cuts are made, are the cheeks mounted so the flanges is inside the cowling with the bubble of the cheek poking through the cut out hole, or does the entire cheek sit out side of the cowling? Thanks for any advice. Steve ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Follow up lower bowl, Subaru EA-81
Date: Jun 04, 2002
I ended up sanding down the flanges to taper them, doing the same with the cheeks and then glassed them in from the outside. I'm also going to redo the top piece. I have too much of a gap on the top, so I'm going to glass some extensions on to the sides of the top piece and go from there. I'm also thinking of putting in a door or two to allow preflight without removing the top cowl. ----- Original Message ----- From: <STEFREE(at)aol.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Follow up lower bowl, Subaru EA-81 > > Hi List, > > Thanks for the recent advioce on the bottom cowling. I ma in the process of > making the cuts for the cheeks and I hope this is not my dumb question for > the day, but here goes...... > > After the cuts are made, are the cheeks mounted so the flanges is inside the > cowling with the bubble of the cheek poking through the cut out hole, or does > the entire cheek sit out side of the cowling? > > Thanks for any advice. > > Steve > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 04, 2002
From: Brett Hanley <bretttdc(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Geo/Metro/Suzuki 1000 engine
How is the performance of a 701 with a Geo/Metro 1000 engine. Anyone out there with experence http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Charles Sonberg" <2408s@cox-internet.com>
Subject: Re: Follow up lower bowl, Subaru EA-81
Date: Jun 04, 2002
> On the cheek pieces I ended up using 1/3 on one side and 2/3 on the other. I cut pieces down and left them on the outside mounting with a layer of fiberglass. I mixed up a small ammount of fiberglass putty and spread along seam on outside. Chuck > Thanks for the recent advioce on the bottom cowling. I ma in the process of > making the cuts for the cheeks and I hope this is not my dumb question for > the day, but here goes...... > > After the cuts are made, are the cheeks mounted so the flanges is inside the > cowling with the bubble of the cheek poking through the cut out hole, or does > the entire cheek sit out side of the cowling? > > Thanks for any advice. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 04, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Stratus Motor Mount Repaired
Stratus Guys, I had my cracked motor mount repaired. The welder reinforced it as well. There are photos on my web site showing the repair. Go to web site below and click CONSTRUCTION then ENGINE MOUNT FAIL. Mykal at Stratus shipped me a new mount yesterday but I will use the repaired and reinforced one first. I should be back in the air by the Friday. I'll keep everyone posted how things work out. Regards, Bill (N812BM - HDS - Tri - Stratus - Vermont - 138.0 flight hrs. - 212 landings) web site -> http://homepages.together.net/~billvt/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chip W. Erwin" <aircraft(at)czaw.cz>
Subject: Rotax 914 in 701
Date: Jun 05, 2002
Our cruise is normally 100 mph with our 701 aircraft and 912ULS. But we need 5200 rpm if we have the prop set for good climb also. The 912ULS is more than enough HP. The 912 is perfect, but we do spec the 912ULS if you plan to install floats. I agree that the 914 is way to much hp and too expensive. The only exception is for very high altitude operations. Regards, CHIP Chip W. Erwin CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS, S.R.O. Manufacturer of sport aircraft & AIRCRAFT FLOATS Lucn 1824, 686 02 Star Mesto, Czech Republic Tel: (420 632) 543 456 Fax: (420 632) 543 692 USA Fax: (561) 264 0936 Mobile Tel: (420) 602 342 717 E-mail: aircraft(at)czaw.cz www.airplane.cz -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John Thompson the Vne may be 110mph, but has anyone actually reached this in level or even slightly descending flight? From what I've read, most 701's go about 70-80mph. I'm leaning towards a 912S myself, because I'm a big fella wieght wise, and would like to have the option of having amphib floats with a passenger and some gear in the future. --- Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 05, 2002
From: Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com>
Subject: splice plate replacement tools request
Does anyone have a set of wing splice plate replacement tools that I could purchase? Anyone in Canada especially? (Or does anyone in Canada have a recommendation for a good industrial supplier? I'm looking at DoAll at the moment.) Peter Chapman Toronto, ON ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Hartl" <pdhartl(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Jun 05, 2002
Subject: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
I'm relatively new to the list, and perhaps this is an old issue, but in this month's "Experimenter" (June 2002) on the inside back cover there is a description of a side-hinged Zodiac canopy making a unsolicited departure while in straight and level flight - after only 19 hours of flight time. The pilot managed to land safely, thank goodness, but was quoted as saying "he believes the canopy retention system has a design problem and stated his knowledge about several other failures". The article's last paragraph says, "The aircraft kit manufacturer has designed and issued a forward- hinged canopy as a replacement". I have had my kit for 4 years now, and hope to be completing it this year, but as it has the side-hinged canopy, I would sure like to know the story on it. I plan to call Zenith, but am interested in what builders on the matronix list have experienced and/or know about this problem. Thanks, Paul Hartl Paul Hartl, 601HDS Stratus Subaru EA-81 Tail, rear fuse, central wing completed; wings next! FS2002 Aircraft Website: http://home.mindspring.com/~pdhartl/ email: pdhartl(at)mindspring.com or paul_hartl(at)communityschool.org ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
Date: Jun 06, 2002
Paul, I have flown a 601 for eight years with the side hinge construction. No problems and very secure UNLESS the pilot gets the shoulder harness caught in the retaining hook. Dave Austin 601HDS - 912 - 500 hrs ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick" <rwripper(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
Date: Jun 06, 2002
Our chapter lost a canopy on takeoff at 50' with a student pilot at the controls. He lowered the nose and landed abruptly without damage other than a prop tip. We added overcenter, positive latches. I believe the original design requires too an exact setting of the latch. Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Hartl <pdhartl(at)mindspring.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy > > I'm relatively new to the list, and perhaps this is an old issue, but > in this month's "Experimenter" (June 2002) on the inside back > cover there is a description of a side-hinged Zodiac canopy making > a unsolicited departure while in straight and level flight - after only > 19 hours of flight time. The pilot managed to land safely, thank > goodness, but was quoted as saying "he believes the canopy > retention system has a design problem and stated his knowledge > about several other failures". The article's last paragraph says, > "The aircraft kit manufacturer has designed and issued a forward- > hinged canopy as a replacement". > > I have had my kit for 4 years now, and hope to be completing it this > year, but as it has the side-hinged canopy, I would sure like to > know the story on it. I plan to call Zenith, but am interested in > what builders on the matronix list have experienced and/or know > about this problem. > > Thanks, > Paul Hartl > > Paul Hartl, 601HDS Stratus Subaru EA-81 > Tail, rear fuse, central wing completed; wings next! > FS2002 Aircraft Website: http://home.mindspring.com/~pdhartl/ > email: pdhartl(at)mindspring.com or paul_hartl(at)communityschool.org > > ============ Contributions of other form > ============ messages. members. > ============ http://www.matronics.com/subscription http://www.matronics.com/browselist/zenith-list http://www.matronics.com/zenith-list http://www.matronics.com/contribution > ============ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
From: Cleone Markwell <cleone(at)rr1.net>
Subject: Re: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
>-= - The Zenith-List Email Forum - opening canopy. Please add one more by going to Photo Share, May 26, 2002 and see my story and pictures. Best wishes, Cleone Markwell ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Karnes" <jpkarnes(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
Date: Jun 06, 2002
On my first flight, my side opening canopy blew off on final. I know the canopy was latched securely. Bad design. I now have the front opening version. I would never fly again with the side-opening version. > I have had my kit for 4 years now, and hope to be completing it this > year, but as it has the side-hinged canopy, I would sure like to > know the story on it. I plan to call Zenith, but am interested in > what builders on the matronix list have experienced and/or know > about this problem. > > Thanks, > Paul Hartl ________________________________________________________________________________
From: SEAL2CC(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 06, 2002
Subject: Re: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
If nothing else, the forward opening canopy just looks better... Chris Carey 601HDS N601BZ Richmond, VA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Subject: Re: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
Date: Jun 06, 2002
I notice ZAC's builder web site has a new PDF drawing for improved latches that can be backfit over the old design. Bill [snip] > > Did Zenith/Chris Heintz offer any comment or explanation for such an event? > > [snip] > > On my first flight, my side opening canopy blew off on final. I know the ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
From: Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com>
Subject: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
For the record, the ZAC Builders' Pages have a new bulletin (may 02) from Chris Heintz on changing the shape of the side latched canopy hooks, making the hooks longer. The builder still needs to ensure that nothing catches on the hooks. Peter Chapman 601 w. side hinged canopy, using door-hinge style canopy latches ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
Subject: XL rudder mounting
From: Michael R Fortunato <wizard-24(at)juno.com>
One more question and I'll leave you guys alone...:) In mounting the rudder, the upper and lower hinges on the rudder were close --- but not exact -- to mate up with the hinge parts already mounted on the fuselage. I was able to install the rudder, but due to the slight misalignment, some effort is required to get the rudder to turn back and forth. Has anyone else run into this problem? Is it OK to have some resistance? I'm guessing when the nose gear is attached, resistance will only get worse....does that mean I should pull the rudder off and reinstall the upper hinge brackets? (I shudder at the thought of doing this, as I'll have issues with the rivet holes). Thanks again for the input. Mike Fortunato 601XL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
Subject: XL Fuel Routing
From: Michael R Fortunato <wizard-24(at)juno.com>
Help! I've sent the following to ZAC regarding the XL fuel lines and the 4-tank system (I have both the main and auxilliary wing tanks installed), and I wondered if anyone has any input: I wrote to ZAC: "For the fuel system, I have both the main tanks and the auxiliary tanks. The plans (6-S-1) indicate fuel flow for a two tank system, but doesn't show plumbing for 4 tanks. (The builders manual doesn't even touch on the subject). So, is there an updated fuel routing plan available?" ZAC's answer: "Thanks for pointing this out. At this time there are no new drawings to show the fuel shut off valve when using the Auxiliary Fuel tanks. When the left and right tanks are connected together (the two outboard can be connected together in a similar way as the two inboard) the left lank will empty competely before the engine will draw from the right tank. Other than selecting individual tanks there is no remedy for this uneven fuel flow." So, my question for the list is how to handle this. It would seem that while flying, even with just two tanks, I'll have to manually switch from one to the other in flight. I suppose one solution is to run a vent line from one tank to the other, but that's impossible at this stage of the game. I also don't want to install a header tank. I originally figured that since all the tanks are individually vented --- I thought that would enable them to flow evenly. Guess I'm wrong? Thanks for the help. Mike Fortunato 601XL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
From: Mark Wood <mawood(at)zoo.uvm.edu>
Subject: Re: XL rudder mounting
In mounting the rudder, the upper and lower hinges on the rudder were >close --- but not exact -- to mate up with the hinge parts already >mounted on the fuselage. I was able to install the rudder, but due to the >slight misalignment, some effort is required to get the rudder to turn >back and forth. >Has anyone else run into this problem? Is it OK to have some resistance? >I'm guessing when the nose gear is attached, resistance will only get >worse....does that mean I should pull the rudder off and reinstall the >upper hinge brackets? (I shudder at the thought of doing this, as I'll >have issues with the rivet holes). >Mike Fortunato >601XL Mike I have a 601HD and I think the rudder is the same. The space between the rudder and plane was not large enough on mine and I fixed it by rebuilding the upper hinge plate on the plane. To get holes corect I drilled throught the old plate as a template, that worked fine. For another idea, you may be able to ream out the hole a little or even redrill and move up to the next bolt size for the rudder pins. Good luck, Mark Wood ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Re: rear fuse wiring runs
> > >I guess the way I did it is neither cheap, clever nor >light (I used a lot of MS21919), but it is described >here: > >http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/chelectrik.htm > >Michel Pretty interesting! I have a couple of questions - It that RG400 for the antennas? How is that to work with? What did you use to clasp the fuse tray in the stowed position> I think I see some kind of clip, but can't make out the details. Thanks, Gary Liming ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
Subject: Re: XL rudder mounting
From: Michael R Fortunato <wizard-24(at)juno.com>
> I have a 601HD and I think the rudder is the same. The space between > the rudder and plane was not large enough on mine and I fixed it by > rebuilding the upper hinge plate on the plane. Just to clarify in case I didn't give enough info earlier, the problem isn't the distance of the rudder from the fuselage...it's the distance from the top rudder hinge to the bottom hinge....in other words, when you slide the rudder into the bottom hinge, the top hinge doesn't mate perfectly, and there's friction caused by the slight misalignment. But I do appreciate very much you taking the time to try and help. Mike Fortunato 601XL ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
Date: Jun 06, 2002
----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Hartl" <pdhartl(at)mindspring.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy > The article's last paragraph says, > "The aircraft kit manufacturer has designed and issued a forward- > hinged canopy as a replacement". > > I have had my kit for 4 years now, and hope to be completing it this > year, but as it has the side-hinged canopy, I would sure like to > know the story on it. I plan to call Zenith, but am interested in > what builders on the matronix list have experienced and/or know > about this problem. > > Thanks, > Paul Hartl Paul, I've recently been examining my 601 hds forward hinge drawings and found the 601XL drawings much improved. One drawing on the Zenith site for the XL shows a square tube used for the bottom of the canopy frame. Because this seemed simpler, I called Nick and was able to obtain the 3 sheets that describe the 601XL canopy hinge, frame and latching devices along with a better position for the pair of push-cylinders. This was very timely, because I'd begun some of the parts that hadn't changed. The XL frame hinge is easier to do and is a better solution to a potential latching problem. Larry C. McFarland @ macsmachine.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Subject: 601 lower engine mount fittings
Date: Jun 06, 2002
I'm about to drill the holes for the AN3 bolts through the 6F7-3 lower engine mount fittings. Both the plans and the on-line drawings show the hole closest to the firewall to be 18mm from the bend, but that would put the hole right at the edge of the 6F7-4 firewall stiffener. Is this truly where that hole is positioned? Thanks for any help. Bill Steer ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Phil Maxson" <pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: XL rudder mounting
Date: Jun 06, 2002
I know this probably won't help you, but when I built my rudder at the factory workshop they told us to wait to install the top hinge to the rudder until we were ready to install the rudder on the tail. Mine's still waiting. Maybe this is advice to a future rudder builder. Phil Maxson 601 XL ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: XL rudder mounting
Date: Jun 06, 2002
Mike, My 601 was like that. I used a shim to adjust the top mount on the fuse to remove the bind. Suggest you don't leave it binding as you describe. Dave Austin 601HDS - 912 - 500 hrs ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: She walks!!!
Hello friends, With the help of my wife and some friends, I achieved a major milestone in the life of my project this evening. My plane is on her own wheels! Once I install the lower longerons, the primary structure will be completed and ready for pre-cover inspection. So... at this pace, will I be flying in 1-1/2 months or still in a few years? :-) Michel PS: Gary, I'll send you a couple of pictures of my fuse panel bracket. This is an idea I got from J. Small and F. Hulen. ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: rear fuse wiring runs
Hi Gary, Yes, I bought RG400 for all antennas (ELT, COM and Transponder). It was very easy to work with that cable. But I used AMP tools borrowed from the office (they used to use them when the Ethernet networks were wired with coaxial cables). Jeff Small and Fred Hulen installed their fuse panel like that. I took the idea from them. The system is very simple and while initially I did'nt think it was good enough, after trying it, I am pretty confident that it will be very good. See attached: ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "H. Robert Schoenberger" <HRS4(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: Drilling cotter holes in small round shafts.
Date: Jun 06, 2002
List . . . Building a 701. What's the best procedure for drilling the 1/16" cotter pin hole in the side of the small round outboard hinge pin which supports the elevator at either end. I am using a floor model Sears drill press; the piece was clamped into a piece of 2" x 4" with a slot in it to support the round shaft; and the 2" x 4" was clamped to the bed of the drill press. The drill point tended to wobble off the top center of the shaft as pressure was applied. I tried to punch the starting point with a spring load punch, but the material is very hard, and I didn't make muich of a dent. Then the drill broke off inside the hole that I finally got started. At $12+ a pop for this part, I don't want to keep making the same mistake. Questions: 1. Is there a better procedure than above? 2. What kind of drill points should I use? The one I broke was made of titanium from Home Depot. 3. Is it correct that the drill speed should be low in a hard material such as this and fast in a soft material like aluminum? (I got this from one of the resource pages on the ZAC Builder site.) Thanks for your help. Hap Schoenberger 701 tail. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 06, 2002
From: Greg Ferris <ferret(at)forbin.net>
Subject: Re: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy
The original side-opening canopy is flawed; it has proven that is not error-proof with its track record. At decision time for me, the forward opening canopy was new, as appeared to be a real pain to build, so I altered the side opening canopy's design. A few other guys have used the design I have. I believe Mike Fothergill pioneered it, and Jeff Small and I refined it somewhat. It uses 2 steel hinges on each side with pins that engage them. I haven't flown yet, but I'm getting very close. I should get to the wieght and balance this weekend and start it up next week! So I'm not too far off from flying. Greg F. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Weber" <chrisoz(at)gmx.net>
Subject: Canopy hinges
Date: Jun 07, 2002
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Question about Zodiac side-opening canopy Hello Paul, I have the side hinged canopy with the alternate hinges, as laid out in one of the Zenair-Newletters way back in the mid 90s. I did not trust the hooks, and at six foot six didn't have room for them either. The alternate system is easy to build and straightforward: Get 4 solid steel hinges from the hardware shop, take the hacksaw and trim them down so you have three loops on one side and two on the other. Take the hinge pin out and discard it. Rivet the double loop part onto a piece of extruded angle, and rivet the angle on the upper longeron at the front and rear of the cockpit sides. Rivet the triple loop hinge-halfs onto the bottom of the canopy, of course in the matching positions to their counterparts on the longeron. Get two length of piano wire, same size as the original hinge-pins, bend them to a narrow, assymetric U, and slide them through the hinges. With a retainer to keep them from slipping out they work nicely, when in the open position the hingepin rests in the last of the three hinge-loops, and you can lift the canopy. Don't know wether this description makes any sense to you, I can sent a picture or look wether I can find the original drawing from CH. It works well, has a nice, solid feel about it, goes clunk when I close it and stays on at 130 knots. Chris Weber Zodiac 601 TD 912,"Small and Humble", 39 hours Zodiac 601 HD(S), 1% and 2000$ spent on Material (can't believe I'm really doing this) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "The Meiste's" <meiste(at)essex1.com>
Subject: Re: Drilling cotter holes in small round shafts.
Date: Jun 07, 2002
Hap, Don't try to drill the hardened hinge pin. Just cut it short of the end of the hinge, then just drill the hinge barrel only to insert your safety wire or cotter pin. Kelly 601 HD (95%) ----- Original Message ----- From: "H. Robert Schoenberger" <HRS4(at)prodigy.net> Subject: Zenith-List: Drilling cotter holes in small round shafts. > > List . . . Building a 701. What's the best procedure for drilling the > 1/16" cotter pin hole in the side of the small round outboard hinge pin > which supports the elevator at either end > Questions: > 1. Is there a better procedure than above? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 07, 2002
From: Todd Osborne <todd(at)toddtown.com>
Subject: Re: Drilling cotter holes in small round shafts.
The way that I have found works best for me is to center punch the hole location on each side and leave the pin in to provide support so you don't crush the edge. Then, drill one side at a time. Resist the urge to go completely through. I use a standard hand drill, not a press, when doing the hinges. Todd > >List . . . Building a 701. What's the best procedure for drilling the >1/16" cotter pin hole in the side of the small round outboard hinge pin >which supports the elevator at either end. I am using a floor model >Sears drill press; the piece was clamped into a piece of 2" x 4" with a >slot in it to support the round shaft; and the 2" x 4" was clamped to >the bed of the drill press. The drill point tended to wobble off the >top center of the shaft as pressure was applied. I tried to punch the >starting point with a spring load punch, but the material is very hard, >and I didn't make muich of a dent. Then the drill broke off inside the >hole that I finally got started. At $12+ a pop for this part, I don't >want to keep making the same mistake. > >Questions: >1. Is there a better procedure than above? >2. What kind of drill points should I use? The one I broke was made of >titanium from Home Depot. >3. Is it correct that the drill speed should be low in a hard material >such as this and fast in a soft material like aluminum? (I got this >from one of the resource pages on the ZAC Builder site.) > >Thanks for your help. Hap Schoenberger 701 tail. > > Todd Osborne Internet E-Mail: todd(at)toddtown.com AOL Messenger: toddosborn ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Hartl" <pdhartl(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Jun 07, 2002
Subject: Side-opening Zodiac canopy design flaw
Thanks to all for the fast responses and the many suggestions! It's clear that most Zodiac flyers regard the original design as flawed, and that too many have experienced a failure incident. It also seems that ZAC has made design changes, and apparently a retro- fit for existing side-openers. Now to sort out the pros and cons of modified side versus front hinge...... Thanks again - this list and you contributors on it are awesome! Paul Paul Hartl, 601HDS Stratus Subaru EA-81 Tail, rear fuse, central wing completed; wings next! FS2002 Aircraft Website: http://home.mindspring.com/~pdhartl/ email: pdhartl(at)mindspring.com or paul_hartl(at)communityschool.org ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: 601 lower engine mount fittings
Date: Jun 07, 2002
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> Subject: Zenith-List: 601 lower engine mount fittings > > I'm about to drill the holes for the AN3 bolts through the 6F7-3 lower engine > mount fittings. Both the plans and the on-line drawings show the hole closest > to the firewall to be 18mm from the bend, but that would put the hole right at > the edge of the 6F7-4 firewall stiffener. Is this truly where that hole is > positioned? > > Thanks for any help. > > Bill Steer > Bill, I just looked at my firewall and the hole you are about to drill should be about the same distance from the end of the 6F7-4 because mine ends at the bend. You can see this perhaps easier on my web site under firewall. Larry McFarland 601-hds at macsmachine.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 08, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Stratus radiator installation
Could someone on this list provide me with details (dimension, materials, position and installation) of the radiator mount for the Stratus engine? Detail pictures would also really be appreciated. I am considering installing my radiator like that. Until now, I wanted a firewall installation, but the way my engine mount is built, I cannot easilly do that (I'd have to get the engine mount modified). Thanks! Michel ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61(at)birch.net>
Subject: Zodiac canopy design
Date: Jun 09, 2002
> Fred Poor posted: > Second, the "front opening" canopy isn't going to be > all that you folks think it is going to be-- When > open, it is going to make one hell of a sail and I'm > predicting you folks will be reading about 601's > blowing (rolling) into other aircraft and causing > accidents-- also you'll be hearing about the wind > tearing your canopies off the plane or blowing into > the prop. The forward tilting canopy is a "band-aid" > cure and nothing more. ++ Just an observation: Properly secured, I believe the side opening version is just as safe as the front opening version. Jeff Small has engineered and installed a side opening version (a refinement of an improved version by Mike Fothergill) that is smooth as silk and very immune to accidental opening. The key seems to be a REDUNDANT safety system that must be intentionally defeated before the normal unlatching procedures will open the canopy. This prevents accidental unlatching. The front opening canopy system has also served many aircraft (including RV's) for many years, and I haven't seen any postings or news listings about them causing problems as proposed above. Barry Mayne in Australia lost his side opening canopy during flight and replaced it with the front opening version because he had nearly crashed when the side opening one blew off. After flying with the front opening version for a while, insatiable curiosity was there as to what would happen IF the latches were unlatched in flight. He rigged up some safety straps that would allow the canopy to only open a maximum of about 4-6 inches and proceeded on a take-off roll with both latches released. He related that the canopy merely lifted up about 2 inches at the back and just stayed there, so he went ahead and took off. It didn't wiggle around or tend to pump up and down. He said that all by himself he couldn't fly the plane and get the canopy latched back down, but said he believed that if he had a passenger with him that he thought they could have secured it without much trouble. He did a circuit around the pattern and landed, feeling better now that he knew the results. Perhaps Barry will read this posting and add some more comments. Smoooooth landings everybody! Fred Hulen Area 41 Snailworks "still completing odds and ends, and prepping for paint" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Stratus radiator installation
Date: Jun 09, 2002
I'm currently experimenting with my installation. The factory installation works fine, until you try an extended climb in Georgia on a hot summer day. I'm working on building a scoop to go around the radiator and channel the air. It should also protect me better from stones in the radiator and such. I'll let the rest of you know how it goes. I'm also thinking about ways to close that huge openning in the front of the cowl (major drag source) and just have a ram air for the carbs. This should be easier than improving the radiator situation since the nose gear and exhaust both pass right in front of the radiator. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Stratus radiator installation > > Could someone on this list provide me with details > (dimension, materials, position and installation) of > the radiator mount for the Stratus engine? Detail > pictures would also really be appreciated. > > I am considering installing my radiator like that. > Until now, I wanted a firewall installation, but the > way my engine mount is built, I cannot easilly do that > (I'd have to get the engine mount modified). > > Thanks! > > Michel > > ===== > ---------------------------- > Michel Therrien CH601-HD > http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby > http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 > http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby > > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 09, 2002
Subject: Re: Zodiac canopy design
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
on 09/06/02 01:19, Fred or Sandy Hulen at hulens61(at)birch.net wrote: > >> Fred Poor posted: >>... When >> open, it is going to make one hell of a sail At the risk of 'beating this to death'... I'm planning to convert to the fwd opening canopy because: 1/ it's safer in the event of a opening-in-flight (and thanks for the information about what happens if/when it happens -- that's about what I'd expected by analyzing it aerodynamically and comparing it to others) 2/ it's MORE CONVENIENT on the ground. When I'm doing work on the aircraft panel, etc.. and have to have access to one side, then the other, I'm already tired of going through the steps to close one side, then open the other, then repeat the process to go back, and forth and back and forth.... 3/ I like the looks better 4/ I'll install an anchor if the 'sail' thing becomes a problem... ;-) -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Brigman" <jbrigman(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: canopy talk
Date: Jun 09, 2002
Fred; I'm interested in reading the thread and I'm sure lots of others are. It's helpful to our thinking processes to hear what others are doing. I found Jeff Davidson's opinion interesting and certainly do NOT want Jeff to stop contributing to the list. (I also happen to agree with Jeff, but that's beside the point.) We on the list have yet to see your prediction of doom to come true. 650lbs is a lot of weight to move with such a small "sail". I have a hatch on the back of my minivan that opens just like the forward-hinged canopy and it doesn't wander down the street on wind power. :-) The only thing I can think of that might be nicer is the slide-back canopy (like on the RV's, AA1/AA5, etc), but that's a heavier solution than the side or forward-folding canopy. Steve Freeman has reported on one 601 builder I can think of who did a REALLY NICE slide-back canopy. It works well but is a little heavier. The Katanas have a super-sweet solution with their canopies, it's a variant of the slide-back that is a little more lightweight. But the hardware is complicated and might not translate well from glass to aluminum-don't know. Some 601 builders "get wild" and do a full overhead frame with opening gull-wing doors. There's a licensed variant of the 601 built in South America that has this-there was an article on it in Kitplanes a few years ago. Nice plane. Chris has used this idea before and implemented it in the 640 and CH2000. It takes a little more build time but it's a nice solution. I searched the archives and the zac builder website and couldn't find you. What are you building? Are you working on the canopy at this time? I'm purposefully leaving out the magic phrase so this message will get archived. JKB > > First off-why was this sent to the entire list ??? > and not directly to Paul???? > Second, the "front opening" canopy isn't going to be > all that you folks think it is going to be-- When > open, it is going to make one hell of a sail and I'm > predicting you folks will be reading about 601's > blowing (rolling) into other aircraft and causing > accidents-- also you'll be hearing about the wind > tearing your canopies off the plane or blowing into > the prop. The forward tilting canopy is a "band-aid" > cure and nothing more. "Fred" no not archive ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 09, 2002
Subject: Cowl pin
Hi LIst, I'm working on installing my cowling (a chore, but not as bad as I feared. Lots of cutting, fitting, and then cutting again) and I am wondering where to install the 2 "cowl pins" that came with my FWF kit. It is probably in the plans but I am missing it. For the record, ZAC's markings were very close to being dead on, but needed to be enlarged more than anything else. The bottom fairing for the air scoop outline was at an appropriate width but the side lines had to be extended more than double their drawn length. This is deceiving as since there are no plans with the FWF kit you have to figure it out as you go. Any help would be greatly appreciated. One last question while I'm at it, How mnay DZUS fasterns are people using around the top and bottom circumference, and along the horizontal seam of the cowl? If nothing else, so far, everything fits very nicely! Thanks guys. On a very sad side note, an experimental bi-plane went down in Chandler, AZ. this weekend killing the pilot and his 16 year old daughter. Reports are that the plane spiraled into the ground shortly after take-off. Cause of accident is being investigated. Please fly safe friends.........It is an exciting but unforgiving hobby. Steve Freeman ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Alberti" <daberti(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Cowl pin
Date: Jun 09, 2002
The instructions are in the assembly manual not in the drawings. I heated mine and bent them over a piece of pipe to get the curved shape. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: <STEFREE(at)aol.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Cowl pin > > Hi LIst, > > I'm working on installing my cowling (a chore, but not as bad as I feared. > Lots of cutting, fitting, and then cutting again) and I am wondering where to > install the 2 "cowl pins" that came with my FWF kit. It is probably in the > plans but I am missing it. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 09, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Stratus radiator installation
That's nice, but I'd like to know what is the baseline installation.... nobody can help me with this? --- Philip Polstra wrote: > > I'm currently experimenting with my installation. > The factory installation > works fine, until you try an extended climb in > Georgia on a hot summer day. > I'm working on building a scoop to go around the > radiator and channel the > air. It should also protect me better from stones in > the radiator and such. > I'll let the rest of you know how it goes. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > Could someone on this list provide me with details > > (dimension, materials, position and installation) > of > > the radiator mount for the Stratus engine? Detail > > pictures would also really be appreciated. > > ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: TOMGILES(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 09, 2002
Subject: Re: Zodiac side-opening canopy
I have the side opening canopy using the alternate method. I rigged up a latch on each side held in place by a small spring to prevent the attaching rod from sliding forward by itself. That has worked well. After about 25 hours I noticed the rear attachments, both sides, and top and bottom were starting to come loose from the canopy and the upper longeron. I had installed the hinges with 2 or 3 A4 rivets. Now I use 3 A5s on both the top and bottom hinges. The hinges are also a part of my preflight. Remember there is a good bit of low pressure on the back of the canopy in flight. Mine lifts up about a 1/4-1/2" while flying. Check the hinges frequently to prevent surprises. If you are careful and preflight properly any canopy arrangement will work satisfactorily. PS I really like cruising around on 3.5 gal/hr. Life is good. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 09, 2002
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Zodiac canopy design
I remember that the Long Eze (or Vari Eze) used to have problems with their side opening canopy... That problem was solved long time ago, maybe looking at their locking system could help... Just an idea. Saludos Gary Gower CH 701, (both wing almost ready to cover) --- Grant Corriveau wrote: > > > on 09/06/02 01:19, Fred or Sandy Hulen at > hulens61(at)birch.net wrote: > > Hulen" > > > >> Fred Poor posted: > >>... When > >> open, it is going to make one hell of a sail > > At the risk of 'beating this to death'... > > I'm planning to convert to the fwd opening canopy > because: > > 1/ it's safer in the event of a opening-in-flight > (and thanks for the > information about what happens if/when it happens -- > that's about what I'd > expected by analyzing it aerodynamically and > comparing it to others) > > 2/ it's MORE CONVENIENT on the ground. When I'm > doing work on the aircraft > panel, etc.. and have to have access to one side, > then the other, I'm > already tired of going through the steps to close > one side, then open the > other, then repeat the process to go back, and forth > and back and forth.... > > 3/ I like the looks better > > 4/ I'll install an anchor if the 'sail' thing > becomes a problem... ;-) > > -- > Grant Corriveau > Montreal > Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 > C-GHTF > www.theWingStayedON.ca > > > > Contributions of > any other form > > latest messages. > other List members. > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/search > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RLucka(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 09, 2002
Subject: Stratus Engine Mount Crack Revisited
Hi Stratus Guys Thanks to Bill Morelli, I spent almost an hour scutinizing my Stratus-supplied engine mounts with a trouble light and a magnifying glass and found a small crack about 7mm long in the same engine mount as Bill's mount - the upper right mount as viewed from the cockpit looking forward to the prop. The crack starts in the upper gusset and passed the weld to the vertical part of the mount. I have 112 hours on the engine. My theory as to why this particular mount shows a crack and not the others is due to the "P-factor", where there is more thrust on the right side (causing yaw to the left that is corrected by applying right rudder) and the upper right mount takes the most pulling load, hence the crack. This is just a theory but it makes sense to me. I took the mount off and will strip the paint and take it to a welder who does work for the local A&P mechanics. All you Stratus guys, take the time to check your mounts, especially the upper right one. Dick (601-HDS, Stratus Soob, 112 flying hours) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 09, 2002
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: canopy talk
James, To get your post archived you should erase the other "magic words" in Freds note bellow yours :-( Saludos Gary Gower --- James Brigman wrote: > > > Fred; > > I'm interested in reading the thread and I'm sure > lots of others are. It's > helpful to our thinking processes to hear what > others are doing. I found > Jeff Davidson's opinion interesting and certainly do > NOT want Jeff to stop > contributing to the list. (I also happen to agree > with Jeff, but that's > beside the point.) > > We on the list have yet to see your prediction of > doom to come true. 650lbs > is a lot of weight to move with such a small "sail". > I have a hatch on the > back of my minivan that opens just like the > forward-hinged canopy and it > doesn't wander down the street on wind power. :-) > > The only thing I can think of that might be nicer is > the slide-back canopy > (like on the RV's, AA1/AA5, etc), but that's a > heavier solution than the > side or forward-folding canopy. Steve Freeman has > reported on one 601 > builder I can think of who did a REALLY NICE > slide-back canopy. It works > well but is a little heavier. > > The Katanas have a super-sweet solution with their > canopies, it's a variant > of the slide-back that is a little more lightweight. > But the hardware is > complicated and might not translate well from glass > to aluminum-don't know. > > Some 601 builders "get wild" and do a full overhead > frame with opening > gull-wing doors. There's a licensed variant of the > 601 built in South > America that has this-there was an article on it in > Kitplanes a few years > ago. Nice plane. Chris has used this idea before and > implemented it in the > 640 and CH2000. It takes a little more build time > but it's a nice solution. > > I searched the archives and the zac builder website > and couldn't find you. > What are you building? Are you working on the canopy > at this time? > > I'm purposefully leaving out the magic phrase so > this message will get > archived. > > JKB > > > > > > > First off-why was this sent to the entire list > ??? > > and not directly to Paul???? > > Second, the "front opening" canopy isn't going > to be > > all that you folks think it is going to be-- When > > open, it is going to make one hell of a sail and > I'm > > predicting you folks will be reading about 601's > > blowing (rolling) into other aircraft and causing > > accidents-- also you'll be hearing about the wind > > tearing your canopies off the plane or blowing > into > > the prop. The forward tilting canopy is a > "band-aid" > > cure and nothing more. "Fred" http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Subject: Re: Cowl pin
In a message dated 6/9/02 2:13:09 PM US Mountain Standard Time, daberti(at)execpc.com writes: > I heated > mine and bent them over a piece of pipe to get the curved shape. > Hi Dave, What part did you have to heat to bend? This is not mentioned in the construction manual. Did you feel you had to do this so the flanges more closely corresponded to the cowling? Any other input on the cowling pins would be appreciated. Steve ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bruce Bockius" <bruce(at)whiteantelopesoftware.com>
Subject: Zodiac side-opening canopy
Date: Jun 09, 2002
I have the same setup and around 200 hours noticed that the A5 rivets I'd used to attach the hinges to the canopy were getting loose. There isn't any room for larger rivets, so I replaced them with steel A5's. -Bruce/601HD/TDO/Stratus/305 hrs > > I have the side opening canopy using the alternate method. I > rigged up a > latch on each side held in place by a small spring to prevent > the attaching > rod from sliding forward by itself. That has worked well. > After about 25 > hours I noticed the rear attachments, both sides, and top and > bottom were > starting to come loose from the canopy and the upper longeron. I had > installed the hinges with 2 or 3 A4 rivets. Now I use 3 A5s > on both the top > and bottom hinges. The hinges are also a part of my > preflight. Remember > there is a good bit of low pressure on the back of the canopy > in flight. > Mine lifts up about a 1/4-1/2" while flying. Check the > hinges frequently to > prevent surprises. If you are careful and preflight properly > any canopy > arrangement will work satisfactorily. > PS I really like cruising around on 3.5 gal/hr. Life is good. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dabusmith(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Subject: 701 Cowl
List Does the 912 engine cowl long enough to contact the firewall all the way along the sides? My fwd side skins don't extend very far past the firewall (maybe 3/4" at the 5:00 and 7:00 positions) Is this normal? Dave Smith Atlanta Getting close to ordering my engine ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard Rourke" <danarourke(at)msn.com>
Subject: Canopy-sails
Date: Jun 10, 2002
While waiting for sports/regs, my idle mind was attracted to a possible use of the forward-opening canopy on 601 models: has anyone with floats mounted (Skip at Czech, for example) gone sailing with the forward canopy extended? Strikes me I'd still have to add float rudders (and hope that the FAA extend the gross to 1300 lbs., as suggested by Chris). As this is only of interest to one builder, perhaps answers could be off -list.. Thanks, ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 10, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Re: Stratus Engine Mount Crack Revisited
Dick, I talked to the fellow that welded my cracked mount and he believes that the crack was caused by the fact that the gusset that is welded on the top did not extend far enough forward. He also reinforced the side where the crack was. (see photos on my web site for repaired mount). I did receive a new mount from Stratus but It is the exact same mount as the original. I'm flying again with the repaired mount and I'll keep a close eye on it. This time I stripped and painted the mount so I could see any cracks more easily. Regards, Bill (N812BM - HDS - Tri - Stratus - Vermont - 142.6 flight hrs. - 222 landings) web site -> http://homepages.together.net/~billvt/ >I took the mount off and will strip the paint and take it to a welder who >does work for the local A&P mechanics. > >All you Stratus guys, take the time to check your mounts, especially the >upper right one. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Weston, Jim" <Jim.Weston(at)delta.com>
Subject: Zodiac side-opening canopy
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Just a guess, but I would think that all of you folks using the alternate hinge methods need to keep a close look at the attach points. Changing the design is fine, that is what "Experimental" aircraft are all about. But you need to make sure that what is used for a replacement is as good, or superior, in all respects. The canopy creates a lot of lift, due to its curviture. This puts a load on the attach points. A few rivets at each hinge point may not be strong enough to support the lifting force on the canopy in flight. Just my two cents. Worth just what you paid for it. ;-) Jim Weston McDonough, Ga. -----Original Message----- From: TOMGILES(at)aol.com [mailto:TOMGILES(at)aol.com] Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zodiac side-opening canopy I have the side opening canopy using the alternate method. I rigged up a latch on each side held in place by a small spring to prevent the attaching rod from sliding forward by itself. That has worked well. After about 25 hours I noticed the rear attachments, both sides, and top and bottom were starting to come loose from the canopy and the upper longeron. I had installed the hinges with 2 or 3 A4 rivets. Now I use 3 A5s on both the top and bottom hinges. The hinges are also a part of my preflight. Remember there is a good bit of low pressure on the back of the canopy in flight. Mine lifts up about a 1/4-1/2" while flying. Check the hinges frequently to prevent surprises. If you are careful and preflight properly any canopy arrangement will work satisfactorily. PS I really like cruising around on 3.5 gal/hr. Life is good. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Weston, Jim" <Jim.Weston(at)delta.com>
Subject: Stratus radiator installation
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Philip, I guess that we do still need to get together to compare notes. I have thought about an eventual scoop for the radiator, but made a much simpler modification for now (used for 4 years)that works pretty well. It is marginal, at times, but actually cools best during an 80 mph climb. All that I really did was to seal the standard scoop completely, so that any air entering the front opening has to come out through the radiator. There were some pretty large gaps at the rear and along the sides of the radiator mount. Oh, I also wrapped the exhaust system with high temp thermal wrap, like used on race cars. You can do this, since the exhaust on the Stratus is made with stainless steel. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Philip Polstra [mailto:ppolstra(at)mindspring.com] Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stratus radiator installation I'm currently experimenting with my installation. The factory installation works fine, until you try an extended climb in Georgia on a hot summer day. I'm working on building a scoop to go around the radiator and channel the air. It should also protect me better from stones in the radiator and such. I'll let the rest of you know how it goes. I'm also thinking about ways to close that huge openning in the front of the cowl (major drag source) and just have a ram air for the carbs. This should be easier than improving the radiator situation since the nose gear and exhaust both pass right in front of the radiator. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Stratus radiator installation > > Could someone on this list provide me with details > (dimension, materials, position and installation) of > the radiator mount for the Stratus engine? Detail > pictures would also really be appreciated. > > I am considering installing my radiator like that. > Until now, I wanted a firewall installation, but the > way my engine mount is built, I cannot easilly do that > (I'd have to get the engine mount modified). > > Thanks! > > Michel > > ===== > ---------------------------- > Michel Therrien CH601-HD > http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby > http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 > http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby > > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 10, 2002
From: Phil Raker <phadr1(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: rear fuse wiring runs
I went to the local Ace Hardware & bought a 10ft section of 1/2" ID PVC pipe and a couple of band clamps which I mounted along the top longeron to cary the wires. Phil Raker - N556P: HDS/Stratus; hooking up controls & plumbing --- Gary Liming wrote: > > Has anyone come up with a clever (light, cheap, easy installation) way to > run the wires through a conduit of some sort and mount it securely along > the way? > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Shay King" <shaking(at)eircom.net>
Subject: 701 landing gear / elevator cables
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Dear List, I've just installed the landing gear on my 701. I think there may be slight toe out on left main wheel and slight toe in on right mainwheel. I haven't been able to measure the exact amount yet due to confined space in my workshop. The gear spring is installed straight on the fuselage. Has anyone else come up against this problem? Is it worth worrying about since the speeds involved at takeoff and landing in the 701 are so low? I'm about to make up the control cables. I've used some string to get an idea of clearances. It seems the top elevator cable will brush against the flaperon mount when the stick is held to the left. It shouldn't happen when I install the bungee cord and tie it off to the right side of fuselage. I thought the bungee was only to prevent both cables rubbing together. Anyone have this experience also? I've been trying to get the Matronics search engine to get some info on the above problems but my computer can't seem to find the website. Are there problems with the website or is it my computer? Thanks for any help guys, Regards, Shay King. 701, airframe mostly complete, just ordered 912S. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: tubes for factory tires
Date: Jun 10, 2002
What size are the tubs in the standard tires, and where could I pick them up? After flying 3.5 hours today I taxied up to my space and went to push the plane back when I noticed a hissing noise. Sure enough, I have a huge leak in my nosegear. While I was down there I also notice the "not for highway use" on my "made in china" tires. So I can't take them on the highway, but I can land my airplane on them at 90 mph? Philip A. Polstra Certified Flight Instructor - Airplane Single Engine; Instrument Airplane Ground Instructor - Advanced; Instrument NAFI Instructor http://www.philsflying.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Subject: Re: tubes for factory tires
Date: Jun 10, 2002
The pick list from Zenith says the tubes are their part number "TU400/480" and the tires are "T4-00x8-4." I think there was some discussion on this list several months ago about replacement tires. Memory is fuzzy, but there may have been mention of Michelin replacements. You may want to check the archives. Bill > What size are the tubs in the standard tires, and where could I pick them > up? After flying 3.5 hours today I taxied up to my space and went to push ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "michael brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au>
Subject: Re: 701 landing gear / elevator cables
Date: Jun 11, 2002
Shay, there shouldn't be a problem with the landing gear. The problem with the elevator cables is a common one and I had it. The bungee thing works. Isn't it exciting when you have the gear on your bird... mike B ----- Original Message ----- From: Shay King <shaking(at)eircom.net> Subject: Zenith-List: 701 landing gear / elevator cables > > Dear List, > I've just installed the landing gear on my 701. I think there may be > slight toe out on left main wheel and slight toe in on right mainwheel. > I haven't been able to measure the exact amount yet due to confined > space in my workshop. The gear spring is installed straight on the > fuselage. > Has anyone else come up against this problem? > Is it worth worrying about since the speeds involved at takeoff and > landing in the 701 are so low? > > I'm about to make up the control cables. I've used some string to get > an idea of clearances. It seems the top elevator cable will brush > against the flaperon mount when the stick is held to the left. It > shouldn't happen when I install the bungee cord and tie it off to the > right side of fuselage. I thought the bungee was only to prevent both > cables rubbing together. > > Anyone have this experience also? > > I've been trying to get the Matronics search engine to get some info on > the above problems but my computer can't seem to find the website. > Are there problems with the website or is it my computer? > > Thanks for any help guys, > > Regards, > Shay King. 701, airframe mostly complete, just ordered 912S. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: rear fuse wiring runs
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Richard, The trim tab wires and tail light wiring was routed along the upper longeron with standard clamps every 12 inches and tie-ties every 4 just to keep it anchored. Cannot see a reason to tube it, because it's permanent if it's done right. Larry McFarland 601hds @ macsmachine.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Voss" <vozzen(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: rear fuse wiring runs > > > > > Has anyone come up with a clever (light, cheap, easy installation) > > way to > > > run the wires through a conduit of some sort and mount it securely > > along > > > the way? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Subject: Re: tubes for factory tires
From: zoe c johnson <zoejohnson(at)juno.com>
Hey, don't mess around with the wheelbarrow tires.. go to Northern Hydraulics and get the High speed load range C (745 lbs) tire and tube...P/N 12301-c168 (480X8 ) $19.99 and tube P/N 12101-c168 $4.99 ....They'll be with you much longer than the onion skin wheelbarrow tire!!!! Jackie N5JZ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 10, 2002
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: tubes for factory tires
Philip, My personal point of view. The "not for highway use" sign is not for the speed, is for the "time under high speed" of the highway use, based in the design of the nylon plys inside... Just picture this: Imagine you instal this tire in a light trailer and hit the road, when your car (or truck) with 15 inch rims goes to 70 mph, the rpms of your Michelin will be (X) rpms, the little tires are running behind at a aprox scaled speed of maybe 1.8 the speed of your tires = 126 mph; imagine the equivalent (Y) rpms that this tires are running! The plys are not design for that heat/inertia caused by that use and will blow in just a few minutes. In our planes that speed will be for a very short time, less speed in the 701 some more in the 601 XL, in take of the weight in the tires will be less every second, until they just spin free... Something a little oposite in landing. In some products the orientals have very good quality control, the only diference is the cost of the labor, more competition (betwen them), less they charge to survive. We must thank God we dont live there as factory workers. In the rims I got in our kit, they are tubeless and have a "O" ring to prevent leaks from the center of the rims, the tires were the first thing we assembled and we will check the pressure in a week basis, no loose of pressure in the first 12 days... Saludos Gary Gower --- Philip Polstra wrote: > > > What size are the tubs in the standard tires, and > where could I pick them > up? After flying 3.5 hours today I taxied up to my > space and went to push > the plane back when I noticed a hissing noise. Sure > enough, I have a huge > leak in my nosegear. > > While I was down there I also notice the "not for > highway use" on my "made > in china" tires. So I can't take them on the > highway, but I can land my > airplane on them at 90 mph? > > Philip A. Polstra > Certified Flight Instructor - Airplane Single > Engine; Instrument Airplane > Ground Instructor - Advanced; Instrument > NAFI Instructor > http://www.philsflying.com > > > > Contributions of > any other form > > latest messages. > other List members. > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/search > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "patrick walsh" <pwalsh4539(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: tubes for factory tires
Date: Jun 10, 2002
----- Original Message ----- From: zoe c johnson Hey, don't mess around with the wheelbarrow tires.. go to Northern Hydraulics and get the High speed load range C (745 lbs) tire and tube...P/N 12301-c168 (480X8 ) $19.99 and tube P/N 12101-c168 $4.99 ....They'll be with you much longer than the onion skin wheelbarrow tire!!!! Jackie N5JZ ... even the boat trailer tires available at walmart...etc. are a drasticxplorer.msn.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RoyN9869L(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Subject: Re: tubes for factory tires
Jackie, does Northern Hydraulics have a web site? Thanks, Roger ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Subject: Re: tubes for factory tires
Date: Jun 10, 2002
Try www.northerntool.com. Type in the part number (just the digits before the dash) and you'll find it. Bill > > Jackie, does Northern Hydraulics have a web site? Thanks, Roger > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 10, 2002
From: Greg Ferris <ferret(at)forbin.net>
Subject: Re: Zodiac side-opening canopy
I have 4 AN3 countersunk head bolts holding each hinge down to the longerons. As I understand it from Jeff Small, that the design was reviewed by Chris, and he suggested changing to A6 rivets or AN3 bolts. Other than that, he blessed the design. "Weston, Jim" wrote: > Just a guess, but I would think that all of you folks using the alternate > hinge methods need to keep a close look at the attach points. Changing the > design is fine, that is what "Experimental" aircraft are all about. But you > need to make sure that what is used for a replacement is as good, or > superior, in all respects. The canopy creates a lot of lift, due to its > curviture. This puts a load on the attach points. A few rivets at each > hinge point may not be strong enough to support the lifting force on the > canopy in flight. Just my two cents. Worth just what you paid for it. ;-) > > Jim Weston > McDonough, Ga. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Weber" <chrisoz(at)gmx.net>
Subject: CO-poisoning
Date: Jun 11, 2002
Hello Listers, My Zodiac Taildragger has a Rotax 912 UL, bought the engine second hand with 380 h, from a pranged A22 Foxbat. Engine had been checked and was deemed okay, got the whole firewall forward assembly including radiator, exhaust with the heater-jacket, bits and pieces. Before installation I cut the heat-mantle of the original Rotax exhaust off and checked the integrity of the exhaust, as I didn't want to take any chances. Everything looked good, so I welded the mantle back on, but did not hook up the heating system, as I did not trust the idea to get your cabin air heated that way, a small leak, corrosion whatever, and you have a problem. As winter is close down here in Australia and I started to freeze my butt off on my crosscountry flights I shelved plans to connect a cabin-radiator to the cooling sytem of the engine and hooked up the hot air sytem. Worked like a charm, but smelled hot and dusty. The only problems were smoking feet when on, and seepage of hot air into the cabin in the off position, as the pressure in the engine-compartment pushed a certain amount of air throught the inevitable small cracks in the junction-box. Would have been a problem in summer, but quite cosy at the moment. Of course I was still worried about CO, so I discarded the old chemical CO-warning gimick, and got a brand new one in. Kept a closer look on it the first two hours, no problem, weather got warmer, too, so I didn't use the systems due to the hot feet, and thought about a baffle system to distribute the heat better. Then two weeks of bad, winy weather, by the time it was flyable again the novelty of the system was gone and I didn't give it too much thought. Took a friend up yesterday, and he felt quite queasy after the flight, but he had been taking video footage as we were flying in formation with a Messerschmidt 109 Replica, so we put it down to staring through the camera. So today I took off on a balmy and smooth autum day, golden light over the mountains, and about 50 min into the flight, at 3500 feet, as I was doing a couple of tighter turns suddenly everything felt wrong. I lost the feeling for the plane, was puzzled, looked at the VSI to see wether I was going up or down. I went back to straight and level and my legs and hands started to tickle and sting. At the same time I got a fuzzy feeling all over, cotton in my head, and felt myself receeding. I imidiately knew what was happening, cranked my naca vents up as fast as I could, sideslipped the plane to get more air throught the canopy gap, and tried to hold on to that one clear thought. Put my head as far down too the vent as possible, using my left hand to direct freesh air in my face, and talked loudly to myself. Wondered wether I should jettison the canopy, cursed the lack of windows, cursed my stupidity, and throttling back to 4600 put the nose down. After the first minute or so I realized that it didn't get worse, I felt foggy and cotton brained, shaky and weak, but I was able to think fairly straight, so I bee-lined it to the airfield, constant decent, head over the vent, airspeed, airspeed, direction, talking myself through the aproach and the landing, more a passenger on autopilot than anything else. Got her down, switched everything off and threw the canopy up. Trembled badly, drenched in sweat, close to tears. Upon close inspection the CO-warner had single, tiny cristalls that had turned black, not uniform, and no large spots. Just a light sprinkling of tiny black dots. The next hour I tore the heating system out, by the time I was stable enough to drive home. Headace is pretty bad, but the aspirin is working. Things to kick myself for: 1) Lost focus on the new system. 2) Despite lack of trust I didn't wait for the electronic CO-measuring apparatus to come in. 3) Didn't question the fact that my passenger still felt queasy five hours later. Pondering wether I should rename my plane from 'Small and Humble' to 'Killer Queen'. Just joking. Guess I will go for the hot water system after all. Chris Weber Zodiac 601 TD 'Small And Humble', 40 hours and still counting ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Humphries" <paul.humphries1(at)virgin.net>
Subject: Re: CO-poisoning
Date: Jun 11, 2002
Why not look at the electrically heated clothing offered to motorcyclists and simplyfy the aircrasft by not having any heating system at all, via the engine, into the cockpit? Paul Humphries. Stoke-on-Trent, Staffs., UK. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Weber" <chrisoz(at)gmx.net> Subject: Zenith-List: CO-poisoning > > Hello Listers, > > My Zodiac Taildragger has a Rotax 912 UL, bought the engine second hand with > 380 h, from a pranged A22 Foxbat. Engine had been checked and was deemed > okay, got the whole firewall forward assembly including radiator, exhaust > with the heater-jacket, bits and pieces. Before installation I cut the > heat-mantle of the original Rotax exhaust off and checked the integrity of > the exhaust, as I didn't want to take any chances. Everything looked good, > so I welded the mantle back on, but did not hook up the heating system, as I > did not trust the idea to get your cabin air heated that way, a small leak, > corrosion whatever, and you have a problem. As winter is close down here in > Australia and I started to freeze my butt off on my crosscountry flights I > shelved plans to connect a cabin-radiator to the cooling sytem of the engine > and hooked up the hot air sytem. Worked like a charm, but smelled hot and > dusty. The only problems were smoking feet when on, and seepage of hot air > into the cabin in the off position, as the pressure in the > engine-compartment pushed a certain amount of air throught the inevitable > small cracks in the junction-box. Would have been a problem in summer, but > quite cosy at the moment. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "r.p.reynolds" <r.p.reynolds(at)blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: zenith601ul
Date: Jun 11, 2002
I have been reading with interest the comments of the many zenith aircraft builders. I am waiting for my 49% kit to arrive from the Chec Aircraft works in the next few weeks. The CH601UL. Does anyone know the true performance figures for the UL and which Rotax engine will be the best choice, both from buying and running costs. What is the true cruising speed and fuel burn for both the 80HP and the 100HP. Regards Paul R England ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 11, 2002
From: Cleone Markwell <cleone(at)rr1.net>
Subject: 601 performance
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:28:38 -0500 From: Cleone Markwell <cleone(at)rr1.net> Subject: Performance figures for 601 HD After almost 11 months and 123.9 hours I finally feel that I have some pretty good data. engine: Rotax 912 UL in CH601 HD Cruise speed at 5200 rpm is 85 knots or 98 mph Stall speed without power is some where near 41 knots or 47 mph Stall speed with power is very hard to determine because it just wants to nibble at a stall and start flying again. However, high sink rates will develop! I use an angle of attack indicator front and center of my instrument panel just beside the ASI in front of the left seat. Fuel consumption is only 3.75 gph at 5200 rpm. ( and this is less than the Rotax manual quotes, but is what I get using an hour meter that is turned on with the Master SW) ( I have made some checks and the hour meter is very close to my watch on 1 hour trips) Empty weight now has climbed up to about 700 lbs. with oil, radios, coolant flight manual, maps, strobes, a few tools, and 0.025" AL on top skin of fuselage. Also I have added insulation, roll bar etc. However still no paint and still using 100LL fuel. I believe it is ok to raise the gross weight to 1300#s in cool weather at least and use 85 knots or 98 mph as the maneuvering speed. I say this because I have been loaded to that weight and the performance is still great. I use electric trim on elevator and ailerons which have no hinges. Trims very well, however, I could easily operate without the electric trim for a short while, just not as much fun. You can see pictures at: Subject: CH601 modifications http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/cleone@rr1.net.05.26.2002/index.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: randewilbers1(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 11, 2002
Subject: Re: Side-opening Zodiac canopy design flaw
Fred: Are you always this cheerful? Or only when you are constipated? Take my advice and enjoy it all!!! Richard ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kafka, Jeff" <JKafka(at)trojanuv.com>
Subject: Rivet Edge Distance Repair
Date: Jun 12, 2002
List: After two years of education, investigation, preparation, tool acquisition, and procrastination, I have fabricated all required parts for the 601XL rudder and have started to build it. The first hole was a great feeling, and I find I need to use some self-discipline to avoid working past my point of lost judgment. Despite that, perhaps due to a flange being a little narrow, and perhaps not, I find that I did not achieve the 2d minimum distance on the spar flange of rudder ribs 3 & 4. I have about 4mm or so between the center of the last hole and the edge. I have searched the archive and see I have a few options: 1. Make a new rib. 2. Install a piece of scrap. 3. Fill the bad hole with a rivet and add an extra rivet between it and the next hole, with the proper distance (I would probably do another one too, for symmetry). Questions: (a) If I use scrap, it must extend from a point at least 2d from the hole, but how far should it go? 2d to the opposite side of the offending hole, or past the next one too? (b) Is the use of scrap in this way an accepted practice that will satisfy the inspectors? (c) I assume #1 is the best solution if practical. Of the others, is there a clear favorite? Jeff Kafka Prospective 601XL Plans ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 12, 2002
From: Mark Wood <mawood(at)zoo.uvm.edu>
Subject: Re: Rivet Edge Distance Repair
ow, and perhaps not, I find that I did not achieve the 2d minimum >distance on the spar flange of rudder ribs 3 & 4. I have about 4mm or so >between the center of the last hole and the edge. > >I have searched the archive and see I have a few options: > >1. Make a new rib. >2. Install a piece of scrap. >3. Fill the bad hole with a rivet and add an extra rivet between it and >the next hole, with the proper distance (I would probably do another one >too, for symmetry). >Jeff Kafka >Prospective 601XL Plans Jeff #3 gets my vote. If you called Zenith I think this is what they would tell you to do. The edge distance is for strength, so if you fill the hole that will stop any stress risers and when you add another rivet you will take care of the strength. Mark Wood ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: Rivet Edge Distance Repair
Date: Jun 12, 2002
----- Original Message ----- From: "Kafka, Jeff" <JKafka(at)trojanuv.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Rivet Edge Distance Repair > > List: > > After two years of education, investigation, preparation, tool acquisition, > and procrastination, I have fabricated all required parts for the 601XL > rudder and have started to build it. The first hole was a great feeling, > and I find I need to use some self-discipline to avoid working past my point > of lost judgment. Despite that, perhaps due to a flange being a little > narrow, and perhaps not, I find that I did not achieve the 2d minimum > distance on the spar flange of rudder ribs 3 & 4. I have about 4mm or so > between the center of the last hole and the edge. > > I have searched the archive and see I have a few options: > > 1. Make a new rib. > Jeff, Making another rib is the best idea, but the practice of ink marking the center of the ribs freehand and measuring carefully to predrill the skin if it's not prepunched already is the best process. Takes a little time to do but seeing the ink line behind the row of predrilled holes in the skin keeps the holes out of the crimps and edge distance is no longer a factor. This is especially the case when doing wings and the rest of the plane. Good luck, Larry C. McFarland - 601hds scratch building per plans @ macsmachine.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: gage sender connections
Date: Jun 12, 2002
Builders, I'm about to order the engine gages for the Subaru installation and am looking at a tachometer-hourmeter that is electrically driven by connection with a plug or possibly a magnet. In any case, are the senders special because of it being a Subaru versus a Rotax 912 or not? Assuming rpms to 7000 being the case and are any of the other gages peculiar in this way with the Subaru that I might mistakenly order wrong? Thanks Larry C. McFarland - 601hds per plans. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Beattie" <wyne.beattie(at)snet.net>
Subject: Tach Error
Date: Jun 12, 2002
I found an interesting way to increase the cruise speed of my 601 HDS. Install a tach that reads properly. Over the winter I replaced my analog engine instruments with an EIS unit. On the next flight takeoff I noticed that the digital tach was only reading 4990 rpm on climbout when I remember getting at least 5200 rpm on the old tach with a needle. In level flight with full throttle I was only indicating 5200 rpm when I used to get 5600 rpm. The airspeed was the same as I remember from my last flights at about 120 mph at that setting (I'm at sea level). I did the usual checks of the engine and prop pitch (which I had not changed since the last flight). Then I purchased one of those hand held tach checkers with the intent of proving the EIS inacurate. What I found out was that the EIS is right on. I borrowed another to verify the tach checker and it also showed the EIS reading to be accurate. Conclusion is that the old tach was reading high all for the last 180 hours and I was over pitched on the prop. I proceeded to adjust the propeller pitch to get 5600 rpm at full throttle in level flight and now the aircraft indicates 130 mph at 5500 rpm. An added benefit is climb increased by about 200 fpm as well. Now I cruise around at 120 mph and 5000 rpm. Saving gas and getting the same airspeed I used to get. I may see the book value yet some day. If all this speed doesn't rip the canopy off. Anyone out there going to Sentimental Journey to Lock Haven PA next week? Wayne N601WB 912UL ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Weber" <chrisoz(at)gmx.net>
Subject: CO-poisoning
Date: Jun 13, 2002
Hello Listers, after the incident on Tuesday I today inspected my exhaust system at close range, and found a hairline fracture in the exhaust pot. When I got my exhaust it was used and slightly damaged, one side was dented when the donor-plane skidded into the hangar and was written off. Prior to the installation of the exhaust system I had cut the skin of the heat-jacket around the exhaust off completely, inspected the pot closely, hammered the dent out of the jacket-skin and weldet it back on again. It looks like there was a hairline fracture at the junction of the side of the heat jacket and the exhaust pot proper, and as I welded the outside skin of the jacket back on to the side the heat-flow distorted the side a bit and opened the crack, thus allowing exhaust-gases to enter the jacket. As I didn't notice the hairline fracture when the pot was open, and couldn't visually check it after the skin was on it went unnoticed. Should have done a pressure check of the exhaust pot.... I will now cut the jacket off completely and weld the crack up. Looking for a suitable radiator core for the new heating system, should be easy enough to find. Got high temperature resistant silicone and completely closed all the little gaps at the crimps of the firewall, now the only openings are the throttle linkages in the upper part. Happy building and flying, Chris Weber 601 TD 912 'Small And Humble', 40 h ________________________________________________________________________________
From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com
Date: Jun 13, 2002
Subject: Re: zenith601ul
Hi Paul: I also purchased the 601UL from Czech Rep. and is almost finished. As some other spaniards 601 owner's told me, the UL has the similar performance like the HD. The differences make it even better for the UL as improves a little bit (for example) the stol speed. That's all. It really depends from the prop chosen, but almost no difference with the HD. Engine? I chose the 912ULS. Price? 12.200 (including Shipping). Speed? 180 Kms/h, 190Kms/h, depending of the prop. Regards Yago Osset Spain http://www.osset.com/yago I have been reading with interest the comments of the many zenith aircraft builders. I am waiting for my 49% kit to arrive from the Chec Aircraft works in the next few weeks. The CH601UL. Does anyone know the true performance figures for the UL and which Rotax engine will be the best choice, both from buying and running costs. What is the true cruising speed and fuel burn for both the 80HP and the 100HP. Regards Paul R England --------------------------------- Copa del Mundo de la FIFA 2002 El nico lugar de Internet con vdeos de los 64 partidos Apntante ya!. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jari.Kaija(at)pkcgroup.com.by.email.pkcables.com.with.ESMTP.id.MAA24713 (8.9.3/8.9.3)
Subject: Re: 701 Wing Tank Curtis Valves
Date: Jun 13, 2002
06/13/2002 12:56:02 PM > I think it is important to be able to check all 3 > fuel tanks for water and contaminants. Does > anyone know of a flush alternative to the normal > Curtis valve? I'm sure I have seen such valves on > a Cessna but have no idea where to purchase them. You mean this kind of valves? http://www.project-ch701.net/ch701_fuel/big_img4.jpg From Aircraft Spruce? Jari Kaija http://www.project-ch701.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dr. Perry Morrison" <prm(at)softhome.net>
Subject: 100 hrly precedure
Date: Jun 13, 2002
Hi Listers, I'm looking for a procedure/checklist for the first 100 hrly check on my 601 HD. I scoured the archives but didn't find much. Any ideas? Thanks Perry Morrison ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Weston, Jim" <Jim.Weston(at)delta.com>
Subject: 100 hrly precedure
Date: Jun 13, 2002
Perry, I use a checklist from the manual of a Beech Muskateer that I used to own. Obviously, all does not apply, but it does serve as a very good checklist to guide me on what to check. Maybe you could get a similar copy for some aircraft, as a guide. Also, a 100hour inspection is not required for experimental aircraft in the U.S. It is called an 'Annual Condition Inspection', obviously to be done annually. Happy Flying, Jim Weston McDonough, Ga. -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Perry Morrison [mailto:prm(at)softhome.net] Subject: Zenith-List: 100 hrly precedure Hi Listers, I'm looking for a procedure/checklist for the first 100 hrly check on my 601 HD. I scoured the archives but didn't find much. Any ideas? Thanks Perry Morrison ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 13, 2002
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: CO-poisoning
Hello Chris, I dont know what the price of making a complete rebuilt of the damaged parts of your exhaust system will be... Maybe even a complete new system mat not be that expensive, taking in account the risk of that problem repeting in a few months (or years), I will consider changing it more seriously. Saludos Gary Gower 701-912S Wings ready to cover. --- Chris Weber wrote: > > > Hello Listers, > > after the incident on Tuesday I today inspected my > exhaust system at close > range, and found a hairline fracture in the exhaust > pot. When I got my > exhaust it was used and slightly damaged, one side > was dented when the > donor-plane skidded into the hangar and was written > off. Prior to the > installation of the exhaust system I had cut the > skin of the heat-jacket > around the exhaust off completely, inspected the pot > closely, hammered the > dent out of the jacket-skin and weldet it back on > again. It looks like there > was a hairline fracture at the junction of the side > of the heat jacket and > the exhaust pot proper, and as I welded the outside > skin of the jacket back > on to the side the heat-flow distorted the side a > bit and opened the crack, > thus allowing exhaust-gases to enter the jacket. As > I didn't notice the > hairline fracture when the pot was open, and > couldn't visually check it > after the skin was on it went unnoticed. Should have > done a pressure check > of the exhaust pot.... > > I will now cut the jacket off completely and weld > the crack up. Looking for > a suitable radiator core for the new heating system, > should be easy enough > to find. Got high temperature resistant silicone and > completely closed all > the little gaps at the crimps of the firewall, now > the only openings are the > throttle linkages in the upper part. > > Happy building and flying, > > Chris Weber > > 601 TD 912 'Small And Humble', 40 h > > > > Contributions of > any other form > > latest messages. > other List members. > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/search > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)thegateway.net>
Subject: Re: 100 hrly precedure
Date: Jun 13, 2002
Perry, My 701 manual says that if I send Zenith a pix of my 701 in the air they will send me a maintenance manual, however, I'm not flying yet. Chuck D. ----- Original Message ----- From: Dr. Perry Morrison <prm(at)softhome.net> > > I'm looking for a procedure/checklist for the first 100 hrly check on my > 601 HD. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dennis Estenson" <desten(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Rivet Edge Distance Repair
Date: May 14, 2002
Jeff, I'm builing a 601XL from scratch, also, and my philosophy is: I repair no parts! When I make mistakes or the quality is't what I want it to be, I pitch the part and build a new one. Once you fabricate a replacement part, your sense of satisfaction will tell you that you did the right thing. Good Luck, and happy building! Dennis Estenson > --- "Kafka, Jeff" wrote: > > > > > > List: > > > > After two years of education, investigation, > > preparation, tool acquisition, > > and procrastination, I have fabricated all required > > parts for the 601XL > > rudder and have started to build it. The first hole > > was a great feeling, > > and I find I need to use some self-discipline to > > avoid working past my point > > of lost judgment. Despite that, perhaps due to a > > flange being a little > > narrow, and perhaps not, I find that I did not > > achieve the 2d minimum > > distance on the spar flange of rudder ribs 3 & 4. I > > have about 4mm or so > > between the center of the last hole and the edge. > > > > I have searched the archive and see I have a few > > options: > > > > 1. Make a new rib. > > 2. Install a piece of scrap. > > 3. Fill the bad hole with a rivet and add an ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: tires & tubes
Date: Jun 13, 2002
Thanks to Jackie for recommending the tires from Northern. I went and picked up a set of 3 figuring I would change the nosegear now and the mains at some later date, after I got a little more wear on them. The nosegear went flat on Tuesday. I fixed it and did an oil change and adjusted the valves on my Stratus yesterday. So today I go to the airport ready to fly off those last 10 hours, and sure enough one of the mains is flat! Good thing I picked up a complete set of tires. Philip A. Polstra Certified Flight Instructor - Airplane Single Engine; Instrument Airplane Ground Instructor - Advanced; Instrument NAFI Instructor http://www.philsflying.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 13, 2002
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 100 hrly precedure
Hello Chuck: I read the manual and couldnt find where it says so. Is very important, I was thinking now that we are building it to take a note of the parts we think will need to be checked in a regular basis... But if they have one available, is better. Thanks in advance for your answer Saludos Gary Gower beguining the alerions and slats... --- Chuck Deiterich wrote: > > > Perry, > My 701 manual says that if I send Zenith a pix of > my 701 in the air they > will send me a maintenance manual, however, I'm not > flying yet. > Chuck D. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dr. Perry Morrison <prm(at)softhome.net> > > > > I'm looking for a procedure/checklist for the > first 100 hrly check on my > > 601 HD. > > > > Contributions of > any other form > > latest messages. > other List members. > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/search > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 13, 2002
From: alex trent <atrent7(at)cogeco.ca>
Subject: Re: 100 hrly precedure
"Dr. Perry Morrison" wrote: > > Hi Listers, > > I'm looking for a procedure/checklist for the first 100 hrly check on my > 601 HD. I have an owners manual for a CH601 , Jan. 93. It gives fairly detailed procedure for 25 hour and 100 or annual inspections. If you wish I can probably scan it and send it email to you. alex t. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 13, 2002
From: "Darryl West (Home)" <rdwest(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: 100 hrly precedure
I have an annual inspection checklist that I made up for my 601HD/ 912UL. It is in MSWord format. I will email it to anyone who is interested. Darryl rdwest(at)shaw.ca http://members.shaw.ca/rdwest/index.htm Hi Listers, I'm looking for a procedure/checklist for the first 100 hrly check on my 601 HD. I scoured the archives but didn't find much. Any ideas? Thanks Perry Morrison ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Townsend" <601xl(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: 601XL Main Gear
Date: Jun 12, 2002
Hi All, this is directed at the 601XL builders. I'm just about to rout a grove in the rear of the main landing gear to accept the brake line. Question is what have you all done or used for your brake lines. Size both inside diameter as well as outside would be greatly appreciated. Plus how did you install it and where did you run it in the cabin. Also On the boarding step did everyone install as per plans on the bottom of the fuselage or did some of you run it through the inside? I know this plane is a little draggy but surely we needn't add to the fact by sticking a tube on the bottom! Mark Townsend 601XL EA-82 MPFI Turbo ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Phil & Michele Miller <millerpg(at)ps.gen.nz>
Subject: 701 Wing Tank Curtis Valves
Date: Jun 14, 2002
Jari, I tried to reply off-list but message was returned unsent. Thanks for the information. Aircraft Spruce list 9 types of Curtis Valve. Unfortunately they don't have pictures so I can't tell which type to order. Do you know which part number I require? Thanks, Phil Miller New Zealand -----Original Message----- From: 8.9.3/8.9.3 [SMTP:Jari.Kaija(at)pkcgroup.com.by.email.pkcables.com.with.ESMTP.id.MAA24713] Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 Wing Tank Curtis Valves email.pkcables.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA24713 > I think it is important to be able to check all 3 > fuel tanks for water and contaminants. Does > anyone know of a flush alternative to the normal > Curtis valve? I'm sure I have seen such valves on > a Cessna but have no idea where to purchase them. You mean this kind of valves? http://www.project-ch701.net/ch701_fuel/big_img4.jpg >From Aircraft Spruce? Jari Kaija http://www.project-ch701.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 14, 2002
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: List Browsing Feature!
Dear Listers, I thought I'd post a little reminder to everyone about a very slick feature of the email Lists here at Matronics. You can now use Netscape or Internet Explorer to browse the current messages on your favorite List! The List Browse Function tracks the current 7 day's worth of List messages for any given List. Indexes are updated every 30 minutes with new messages that have been posted. You can resort the message indexes by Thread, Subject, Author, or Date and easily track and find current threads. A number of List members have written to say that they love the List Browser because they can keep tabs on the latest List messages throughout the day without having to constantly check their email or wait for the Digest issue to come out. You can check out the List Browse Feature by going to the following URL and clicking on the List of your choice: http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse Enjoy! Matt Dralle Email List Admin. Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dr. Perry Morrison" <prm(at)softhome.net>
Subject: Re: 100 hrly precedure
Date: Jun 14, 2002
That's interesting Chuck. Someone mailed me a pdf file containing a generic 601 owners manual- more geared for the UL but with a good procedure for 25 and 100 hrlys. I think I saw it on the zenith site ages ago. If you'd like copy let me know and I'll forward it. Best Perry Morrison ----- Original Message ----- From: Chuck Deiterich <cfd(at)thegateway.net> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 100 hrly precedure > > Perry, > My 701 manual says that if I send Zenith a pix of my 701 in the air they > will send me a maintenance manual, however, I'm not flying yet. > Chuck D. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dr. Perry Morrison <prm(at)softhome.net> > > > > I'm looking for a procedure/checklist for the first 100 hrly check on my > > 601 HD. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Subject: Re: 701 Wing Tank Curtis Valves
Date: Jun 14, 2002
Assuming the thread on your tanks is the same as the wing tanks on my 601 - 1/8" NPT - the Curtis part would be CCA-1550. There are other manufacturers of drain valves, of course, with different styles. Saf-Air, for example, also makes one, their part number CAV-110, with that thread. Hope this helps. Bill > > Thanks for the information. Aircraft Spruce list 9 types of Curtis Valve. > Unfortunately they don't have pictures so I can't tell which type to order. > Do you know which part number I require? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 14, 2002
From: Justin <justin(at)jkath.com>
Subject: flying IFR in your 601
Hi all, I'm new to the list, and currently making the big decision over which homebuilt to buy. I've been very impressed with the 601hds due to it's performance and low cost/build time. However, I've been thinking about how I would like to use whichever plane I buy, and it seems to me that if I want to go away for weekends, then I'm more likely to need to get back on a Sunday evening than vfr weather may allow. This suggests that having an aircraft that is capable of reasonable IFR flight would be of more use than a purely day vfr one. Out of interest, how many of you fly your zodiacs with an ifr stack and how does the aircraft fly in those conditions. For background, I have a total of about 85 hours on my ppl, and hope to start instrument training later this year. Thanks for your replies, if you would like to contact me off list my address is Justin(at)jkath.com. Cheers, Justin. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: flying IFR in your 601
Date: Jun 14, 2002
> This suggests that having an aircraft that is capable of reasonable IFR > flight would be of more use than a purely day vfr one. > > Out of interest, how many of you fly your zodiacs with an ifr stack and how > does the aircraft fly in those conditions. > There is no reason you couldn't equip a Zodiac for IFR flight. Especially nowadays when you can drop in Garmin 430 in the plane that has gyros and be IFR ready. I chose not to given that the cost to go to IFR was about $13k, 50% of total cost of the aircraft. It didn't make sense for me at the time, but I might upgrade in the future if prices come down. It is a very light aircraft and you will definitely feel any sort of turbulence. Having said that, on days with low clouds or rain it probably wouldn't be a bad ride. It would be foolish to try and skirt thunderstorms in an aircraft of this size. Phil Polstra CFII http://www.philsflying.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)thegateway.net>
Subject: Re: 100 hrly precedure
Date: Jun 14, 2002
Hi Gary, I have the 3rd edition dated 1996 of the Ch701 construction manual. Page 48 (the last page) says fill out the Aircraft Completion Form and send it to Zenith with an 8X10 color picture of your aircraft in the air and they will send you free "maintenance instructions". On the ZAC web page in the builders area http://www.zenithair.com/bldr/bldr.htm (you need the password to get here) near the bottom of the 701 section is an operating manual for the 701 (written by Chip Irwin I would guess). Its a PDF file and very comprehensive, from preflight to some maintenance items. It is worth downloading. I can send it to you as a WORD doc it you wish, I have made some changes for my Jabiru 2200. But the original is for a Rotax. Below is the contents. 1. General 2 2. Limitations 4 3 . Emergency procedures 8 4. Normal procedures 10 5. Performance 14 6. Weight and balance/equipment list 16 7 . Aircraft and systems description 19 8. Aircraft handling, servicing and maintenance 23 9. Supplements 27 .Chuck D. PS Perry, thanks for the offer, but I think I have what I need. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 100 hrly precedure > > Hello Chuck: > > I read the manual and couldnt find where it says so. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne McMullen" <cmcmullen(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: flying IFR in your 601
Date: Jun 14, 2002
In my opinion, there three things to consider in making an aircraft ready for IFR. --The airframe -- The navigation equipment -- The powerplant The 601 meets the first criteria. With enough money you can meet the second condition. The last one is the powerplant. What engine do you want to install and will it keep running under all kinds of weather conditions? Wayne McMullen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin" <justin(at)jkath.com> Subject: Zenith-List: flying IFR in your 601 > > Hi all, > > I'm new to the list, and currently making the big decision over which > homebuilt to buy. > > I've been very impressed with the 601hds due to it's performance and low > cost/build time. However, I've been thinking about how I would like to use > whichever plane I buy, and it seems to me that if I want to go away for > weekends, then I'm more likely to need to get back on a Sunday evening than > vfr weather may allow. > > This suggests that having an aircraft that is capable of reasonable IFR > flight would be of more use than a purely day vfr one. > > Out of interest, how many of you fly your zodiacs with an ifr stack and how > does the aircraft fly in those conditions. > > For background, I have a total of about 85 hours on my ppl, and hope to > start instrument training later this year. > > Thanks for your replies, if you would like to contact me off list my address > is Justin(at)jkath.com. > > Cheers, > > Justin. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Keith Bedell" <bedelk(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: XDP4000X-List: unhappy
Date: Jun 14, 2002
All- I hooked up my xdp-4000x and it sounds like crap. I ordered the necessary cable from online and tried to tune it, but it just got worse. Is there something missing htat I need to do to get it to work. When I bypass it with rca splitters the res of my system works like a charm. I have the 6001ES running three 10' ES subs. Then 2 1805 ES's handling everything else. Aside from the problems with the 4x, there is a huge disparity between cd volume and radio volume. I mean huge!!!. I can max out radio volume and it sounds ok, then pop in a cd and half way blows mee out of the cab. Any ideas, I anm just so dissapointed right now.... From: Matt Dralle <DRALLE(at)MATRONICS.COM> Reply-To: xdp4000x-list(at)matronics.com To: Email-Lists(at)matronics.com Subject: XDP4000X-List: List Browsing Feature! Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 00:52:33 -0700 -- XDP4000X-List message posted by: Matt Dralle Dear Listers, I thought I'd post a little reminder to everyone about a very slick feature of the email Lists here at Matronics. You can now use Netscape or Internet Explorer to browse the current messages on your favorite List! The List Browse Function tracks the current 7 day's worth of List messages for any given List. Indexes are updated every 30 minutes with new messages that have been posted. You can resort the message indexes by Thread, Subject, Author, or Date and easily track and find current threads. A number of List members have written to say that they love the List Browser because they can keep tabs on the latest List messages throughout the day without having to constantly check their email or wait for the Digest issue to come out. You can check out the List Browse Feature by going to the following URL and clicking on the List of your choice: http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse Enjoy! Matt Dralle Email List Admin. Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 14, 2002
Subject: Re: 601XL Main Gear
From: Michael R Fortunato <wizard-24(at)juno.com>
> Also On the boarding step did everyone install as per plans on the > bottom of the fuselage or did some of you run it through the inside? Mark, I can't help yet with the brake lines 'cause I'm not there yet (although I plan to use the tubing that came with the kit), but regarding the step, was yours long enough for the width of the place with enough overlap to connect the two pieces? Mine just barely reaches...not sure what I need to do. Mike Fortunato 601XL ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: flying IFR in your 601
Date: Jun 14, 2002
From: mawood(at)zoo.uvm.edu
> Maybe you should consider others options like "Night VFR annotation" or > > "Over the top annotation", it's a cheaper solution. > Can anyone give a little more info on "Over the top annotation"? What can it do for you, and how do you get it Thanks Mark Wood Assistive Technology Consultant Vermont I-Team Center on Disability and Community Inclusion University of Vermont ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: flying IFR in your 601
Date: Jun 14, 2002
> I agree with Gary all the way. IFR on homebuilt is expensive. Instruments > must be Far approved, and complete, you must consider $10,000.00 just for > that option. To get your instrument rating is complex and expensive, and > you must be evaluated every year. If we're not professionnal, commercial or > fanatic, I'm not sure, it's for us. If the only usage you have in mind is > to come back in bad wheater sunday evening, follow the advise of Gary. > While it might not be worth the money to equip your Zodiac for IFR, I wouldn't say that the rating should be reserved only for professionals. An instrument rating makes you a much safer pilot. Have a look at "The Killing Zone, How & Why Pilots Die" if you don't believe this. I have no gyros and only GPS navigation in my Zodiac. I've already had people ask me what I'll do if I encounter instrument conditions. About the only option is to use partial panel techniques to fly yourself out of the conditions. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net>
Subject: flying IFR in your 601
Date: Jun 14, 2002
While not (yet) an IFR pilot, I have to disagree with Patrick. What's the difference in the IFR capability of a 601 and the IFR capability of a certified airplane? None, as far as I'm aware. What's the design difference between an "IFR plane" and a "VFR plane?" None, as far as I'm aware. (Those aren't even real terms.) Conventional aviation wisdom is that VFR ensures you can get where you're going. An IFR rating makes sure you can get home. As others have mentioned, IFR pilots have been shown to be safer pilots. The number one cause of accidents for VFR pilots is continued VFR flight into IMC. One lister posted that equipment expense is a factor. I do agree with that. However, given that we're building experimental aircraft, it all comes down to personal preference anyway. I'm going to install a NAV receiver in my plane whether or not I get my IFR ticket. So the price differential in equipping my craft for IFR is not far from what my personal "baseline" is anyway. Someone mentioned something about an "over the top" type of endorsement. No such thing exists in the US. VFR pilots are allowed to fly on top of the weather when they can't see the ground. However, ya gotta find a hole in the clouds to get up there, and ya gotta find another hole in the clouds to get back down. Someone mentioned that IFR equipment must be FAR approved. According to a recent thread on the avionics list, this is not so. So, Justin, I'm in your camp. I wanna get my IFR rating and fly an IFR-capable Zodiac. (My question right now is deciding between the 601 and the 640). I, personally, see no reason not to do this, and if this is your goal (as it is mine), I stand here to give you my personal endorsement, for whatever that's worth. :) -Matt > I will join you on your soapbox, Gary. Unless you fly IFR often...best no> t to at all...especially in an aircraft not designed to be an IFR platfor> m. If you must...my own judgement says to do it in a certified aircraft. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 14, 2002
From: Frank Stutzman <stutzman(at)stutzman.com>
Subject: flying IFR in your 601
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Matthew Mucker wrote: > What's the difference in the IFR capability of a 601 and the IFR capability > of a certified airplane? None, as far as I'm aware. The differance is stability. You point your average brand C, P, M, or B aircraft in a direction and it (like an old cow) tends to go there. An experimental aircraft (and I'm generalizing here) tends to be light and responsive on the controls. Thats what makes them fun to fly VFR. And exactly that makes them a chore to hand fly in IFR. Now if you want to invest in a very high end autopilot (one that is capable of doing coupled approaches), then I recind my objections. I have no idea how the 601 flys. It very well could be heavy on the controls. If it is then it is very different than the usual experimental. > Conventional aviation wisdom is that VFR ensures you can get where you're > going. An IFR rating makes sure you can get home. As others have > mentioned, IFR pilots have been shown to be safer pilots. The number one > cause of accidents for VFR pilots is continued VFR flight into IMC. Intestingly enough, the number one cause of accidents for IFR pilots is continued VFR flight into IMC. Rating or not: flying in IMC and not being on the instruments will kill you. Also doesn't matter if your in an experimental or not. Frank Stutzman (instrument rated) Bonanza N494B Soon to be 701 builder Hood River, OR ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: flying IFR in your 601
Date: Jun 14, 2002
My two cents worth.. The 601 HDS is not as stable an aircraft as a Cessna 150. It is very light in pitch and awfully close to marginal in recovery from nose down, nose up and roll conditions on its own. If you trim for hands off, push into nose down and let go, it doesn't recover in the nominal two cycles. Except in very calm air it will not recover from even a minor bank condition without help. Try letting go and reading a map for more than 30 seconds! Of course, all this makes for a wonderfully agile machine that is fun to fly. Is that what you need or want for light plane IFR? Dave Austin 601HDS - 912 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 14, 2002
Subject: Re: flying IFR in your 601
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
on 14/06/02 18:42, tongaloa at tongaloa(at)alltel.net wrote: > > If anyone is interested, my instructor would not let me solo until I could > fly comfortably under the hood. She said, "it's good to know how, even if > you > never plan to". > -bob 'Keeping the blue side up' is a good capability to have - but don't forget to practice it often because it's not something that will stay with you 'like riding a bike'... so if you ever need it, it better not be rusty. IFR in a Zodiac? As good as any other 2-place light aircraft, if you want to spend the bucks. As above - IFR flying 'in the system' is even more demanding than just flying under the hood so it's not something to use just on a 'get home' basis. It is a skill and a system of doing things that needs continual practice just to maintain competence. -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 (equipped for MVFR only) C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "patrick walsh" <pwalsh4539(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: flying IFR in your 601
Date: Jun 14, 2002
Let me clarify. Getting an instrument rating is certainly a good idea and would increase the safety factor of any pilot. My point was to say that just occasionally flying IFR is not a safe practice...that is not a new idea....just look at the statistics. My other point is that the stability of certified aircraft are better suited for IFR. That is also well documented. Not to say that I dont like my 601, to the contrary, I love it. It is , however a sportplane and I sure would not fly IFR occasionally in it.....(no, I do not have an instrument rating) at any rate, SAFE FLYING! Patrick While not (yet) an IFR pilot, I have to disagree with Patrick. What's the difference in the IFR capability of a 601 and the IFR capability of a certified airplane? None, as far as I'm aware. What's the design difference between an "IFR plane" and a "VFR plane?" None, as far as I'm aware. (Those aren't even real terms.) Conventional aviation wisdom is that VFR ensures you can get where you're going. An IFR rating makes sure you can get home. As others have mentioned, IFR pilots have been shown to be safer pilots. The number one cause of accidents for VFR pilots is continued VFR flight into IMC.Get mo ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 14, 2002
From: Fred Poor <fredspoor2002(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: flying IFR in your 601
> 'Keeping the blue side up' is a good capability to > have - but don't forget > to practice it often because it's not something that > will stay with you > 'like riding a bike'... so if you ever need it, it > better not be rusty. > > IFR in a Zodiac? As good as any other 2-place light > aircraft, if you want to > spend the bucks. As above - IFR flying 'in the > system' is even more > demanding than just flying under the hood so it's > not something to use just > on a 'get home' basis. It is a skill and a system > of doing things that > needs continual practice just to maintain > competence. > > -- > Grant Corriveau > Montreal > Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 > (equipped for MVFR only) > C-GHTF > www.theWingStayedON.ca > > very well said Grant, I agree 100%-- stay current to "file" IFR... "Fred" Do not archieve > > Contributions of > any other form > > latest messages. > other List members. > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/search > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Townsend" <601xl(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: 601XL Main Gear
Date: Jun 13, 2002
Sorry Mike I'm a scratch builder so parts fit a whole lot better since I look at the plans twice and measure the plane 3 times. :-) Mark Townsend 601XL EA-82MPFI Turbo -----Original Message----- >> Also On the boarding step did everyone install as per plans on the >> bottom of the fuselage or did some of you run it through the inside? but regarding >the step, was yours long enough for the width of the place with enough >overlap to connect the two pieces? Mine just barely reaches...not sure >what I need to do. > >Mike Fortunato >601XL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 14, 2002
From: James Czyrny <czyrny(at)acsu.buffalo.edu>
Subject: Re: zenith601ul
Did you go to the Czech Republic to do the work or did they do it for you? Jim owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com wrote: > > >Hi Paul: >I also purchased the 601UL from Czech Rep. and is almost finished. As some other spaniards 601 owner's told me, the UL has the similar performance like the HD. The differences make it even better for the UL as improves a little bit (for example) the stol speed. That's all. >It really depends from the prop chosen, but almost no difference with the HD. >Engine? I chose the 912ULS. Price? 12.200 (including Shipping). Speed? 180 Kms/h, 190Kms/h, depending of the prop. > >Regards >Yago Osset >Spain >http://www.osset.com/yago > > >I have been reading with interest the comments of the many zenith >aircraft builders. >I am waiting for my 49% kit to arrive from the Chec Aircraft works >in the next few weeks. The CH601UL. >Does anyone know the true performance figures for the UL and which >Rotax engine will be the best choice, both from buying and running >costs. What is the true cruising speed and fuel burn for both the 80HP >and the 100HP. > >Regards > >Paul R >England > > >--------------------------------- >Copa del Mundo de la FIFA 2002 >El nico lugar de Internet con vdeos de los 64 partidos Apntante ya!. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Townsend" <601xl(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Oshawa Show
Date: Jun 14, 2002
If anyone is going to the Oshawa Air show ( in Ontario) this weekend I'll be working at the RAA booth from 10am to 12am on Sunday if you wish to drop by and say Hi ! Mark Townsend 601XL EA-82 MPFI Turbo ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Asanti ." <asanti999(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Newbie
Date: Jun 15, 2002
After 250 hours of flying production aircraft (C-152, C-172RG and PA-44), my bank balance doesn't look too good! So I am now considering building an experimental airplane to fly to reduce my cost of flying. I am keen on the Zodiac 601 HDS with a 100 HP engine, (possibly the Jabiru 3300 or Rotax 912 S). What sort of direct operating costs would I be looking at (say, per hour) for such an airplane? Thanks in advance ... Asanti http://www.hotmail.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Newbie
Date: Jun 15, 2002
> Zodiac 601 HDS with a 100 HP engine, (possibly the Jabiru 3300 or Rotax 912 > S). What sort of direct operating costs would I be looking at (say, per > hour) for such an airplane? > If I throttle back my Stratus powered 601HDS to about 4000 rpm I burn about 2.5 gallons/hr of 92 unleaded. At 4800 - 5000 rpm my fuel burn goes to 3.5 - 4.5 gallons/hr. Other costs are oil changes every 50 hours at about $20, overhauls at 1000 hrs, replacement belt at 300 hrs. I've bought $15 worth of gas (11 gal) on the way to the airport and then flown 3.5-4.0 hours on that gas multiple times. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Subject: Re: Oshawa Show
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
on 14/06/02 00:20, Mark Townsend at 601xl(at)sympatico.ca wrote: > > If anyone is going to the Oshawa Air show ( in Ontario) this weekend I'll be > working at the RAA booth from 10am to 12am on Sunday if you wish to drop by > and say Hi ! > > Mark Townsend > 601XL EA-82 MPFI Turbo Mark, My wife and I are planning to drive (bad forecast and wings NOT on) down Sunday morning, so we'll be visiting just after your 'shift'... -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: Oshawa Show
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Hi Grant, While you are at the show, take a look at my red/yellow flashes in the tie-down area. Dave Austin 601HDS - 912 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: Newbie
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Asanti, I don't think building airplanes is about saving money. It just isn't there unless you go into ultra lights. The HD would be the best investment because it will likely qualify under the Sport Plane catagory and not require federal registration, a private pilot rating to fly it and you could do your own work. I'm building the hds, but if the 3rd class medical goes, I'll be building a set of hershey bar HD wings. Larry McFarland at http://www.macsmachine.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Asanti ." <asanti999(at)hotmail.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Newbie > > After 250 hours of flying production aircraft (C-152, C-172RG and PA-44), my > bank balance doesn't look too good! So I am now considering building an > experimental airplane to fly to reduce my cost of flying. I am keen on the > Zodiac 601 HDS with a 100 HP engine, (possibly the Jabiru 3300 or Rotax 912 > S). What sort of direct operating costs would I be looking at (say, per > hour) for such an airplane? > > Thanks in advance ... > > Asanti > > http://www.hotmail.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)thegateway.net>
Subject: 701 gear
Date: Jun 15, 2002
On the ground my 701 has a negative pitch attitude of about 1 degree. It seems to me it should be at least level, if not up somewhat, to get lift on the wing without rotation, which will be sudden as soon as the wing gets to a positive angle of attack when the elevator becomes effective. When landing the pitch will be well above level attitude at touchdown. Any thoughts? Chuck D. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 15, 2002
From: Steven Kay <skay(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: 701 gear
I think upon landing and dropping the nose wheel you'd want negative pitch to allow maximum braking if necessary. -Steve Chuck Deiterich wrote: > > On the ground my 701 has a negative pitch attitude of about 1 degree. > It seems to me it should be at least level, if not up somewhat, to get > lift on the wing without rotation, which will be sudden as soon as the > wing gets to a positive angle of attack when the elevator becomes > effective. When landing the pitch will be well above level attitude at > touchdown. > > Any thoughts? > Chuck D. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Tinted film
Date: Jun 15, 2002
> Has anyone put tinted film on Lexan? I got some scraps from a shop. The test > pieces of Lexan I have put the film on seem to develop bubbles over time > outside. Maybe the Lexan out gasses or is actually somewhat porous? I used a > wet film of baby shampoo and a squeegee to install it. Is there a better way > to install it or will I have to buy tinted Plexiglas I would definitely go with the tinted plexiglass. Better to have the tint built in so it can't peel off. The only disadvantage to the tinted stuff is that if you crack it the repair really shows. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 15, 2002
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 100 hrly precedure
Hi Chuck, My plans are (I think) the new edition (we bought the kits 2 months ago), the construction manual is only 18 pages but from then on are lots of pages with very detailed construction photos, they told my father that there were not complete, but when we get to the last one they will have the rest ready. So I think I will go to the builders pages, my Dad mentioned the other day about a password... I think is that one, I will check out. I appreciate very much your offer, hope the file is not to big, because my mailbox has a limit for size of the attachments... if its to big I will ask a friend with cable modem and ilimited space, to recieve it for me and burn it in a CD. Thanks a lot in advance. Saludos Gary Gower --- Chuck Deiterich wrote: > > > Hi Gary, > I have the 3rd edition dated 1996 of the Ch701 > construction manual. Page 48 > (the last page) says fill out the Aircraft > Completion Form and send it to > Zenith with an 8X10 color picture of your aircraft > in the air and they will > send you free "maintenance instructions". > > On the ZAC web page in the builders area > http://www.zenithair.com/bldr/bldr.htm (you need the > password to get here) > near the bottom of the 701 section is an operating > manual for the 701 > (written by Chip Irwin I would guess). Its a PDF > file and very > comprehensive, from preflight to some maintenance > items. It is worth > downloading. I can send it to you as a WORD doc it > you wish, I have made > some changes for my Jabiru 2200. But the original is > for a Rotax. Below is > the contents. > 1. General 2 > 2. Limitations 4 > 3 . Emergency procedures 8 > 4. Normal procedures 10 > 5. Performance 14 > 6. Weight and balance/equipment list 16 > 7 . Aircraft and systems description 19 > 8. Aircraft handling, servicing and maintenance 23 > 9. Supplements 27 > .Chuck D. > PS Perry, thanks for the offer, but I think I have > what I need. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Subject: Need more takeoff power?
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
Nitrous Oxide anyone? I just read an article in an auto performance magazine on adding a 'strap on' Nitrous Oxide system to a Honda fuel injected engine for 'lots more horsepower'.... Apparrently the science and chemistry behind it is that it adds more oxygen to the cylinder, along with a bit more fuel to increase the engine's power at full throttle. The system they install in the Honda seems so simple and safe, I'm wondering why I've never heard of an experimental aircraft using this system to enhance takeoff performance. "Will it damage my engine": Not if you install the correct kit for your application and not if your engine is sound. The engine manufacturer has a safety factor for horsepower produced, cylinder pressures and RPM built into their power plant. The correct kit will not exceed this factor. ..." I know some of you 'out there' are also high perf. auto buffs, so what's up with this? Would it work in an aircraft? It sounds like a chemical way to add 'super-charging'... Could come in handy for those short, high altitude airstrips with trees at the end... If I ever get my aircraft flying and finally get bored flying Sunday hops to the local coffee shop, I can see I have a future as a test pilot. First I want to try the alternative NPG coolant I found out about last year. Then I want to try a Nitrous Oxide system! -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "George Swinford" <grs-pms(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Need more takeoff power?
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Hello Grant: Re your nitrous oxide inquiry, I remember reading that someone tried it on an underpowered amphibian ( airplane, not frog) that wouldn't get off the water. I don't know what effect it had on the engine except to increase the power momentarily. The Germans used it on fighters in WW2. George ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Hartl" <pdhartl(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Subject: Zodiac XL for Flight Simulator 2002
Hi All, I've finally finished my Zodiac series for FS2002. Zenith already has the HDS, HD and HD Floatplane versions at their website, but I just uploaded the XL versions - trike and taildragger - to my own website ( http://home.mindspring.com/~pdhartl/ ), where you can grab them if you're into "simming". You can probably get them from Zenith later in the week, too, but feel free to grab them now - while they're hot! Paul Paul Hartl, 601HDS Stratus Subaru EA-81 Tail, rear fuse, central wing completed; wings next! FS2002 Aircraft Website: http://home.mindspring.com/~pdhartl/ email: pdhartl(at)mindspring.com or paul_hartl(at)communityschool.org ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff Paden" <jeffpaden(at)madbbs.com>
Subject: Re: thanks for all the IFR info
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Why not build the CH-640 then. The ch-640 is a very nice low wing aircraft and is VERY stable. I fly the ch-300 now which is the baby brother to the ch-640... almost the same design and can tell you that it is a GREAT little IFR aircraft. I would never own an aircraft that is not equipped IFR since you never know when mother nature is going to spring a surprise on you. Just my thought on the subject and I hope you don't mind the late reply. Jeff Paden > I think that having read through it all, and done a lot more thinking, that > flying IFR would not be the best thing in the 601. The equipment is not the > factor for me, as that is something that can be saved and built up for. It > would seem that the 601 platform is not ideal for stable and (relatively) > relaxed IFR flight, and that seems to be an important factor from having > talked, and listened, to those who are IFR qualified. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net>
Subject: Zodiac XL for Flight Simulator 2002
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Any plans for a 640? :) -Matt > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Paul Hartl > Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 12:13 PM > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Zenith-List: Zodiac XL for Flight Simulator 2002 > > > > Hi All, > > I've finally finished my Zodiac series for FS2002. Zenith already > has the HDS, HD and HD Floatplane versions at their website, but I > just uploaded the XL versions - trike and taildragger - to my own > website ( http://home.mindspring.com/~pdhartl/ ), where you can > grab them if you're into "simming". You can probably get them from > Zenith later in the week, too, but feel free to grab them now - while > they're hot! > > Paul > > > Paul Hartl, 601HDS Stratus Subaru EA-81 > Tail, rear fuse, central wing completed; wings next! > FS2002 Aircraft Website: http://home.mindspring.com/~pdhartl/ > email: pdhartl(at)mindspring.com or paul_hartl(at)communityschool.org > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JEEdmondson(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Subject: Re: Need more takeoff power?
no experience with nitrous, but what will the tank weigh and where will you put it? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Subject: Re: Need more takeoff power?
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
on 15/06/02 14:44, JEEdmondson(at)aol.com at JEEdmondson(at)aol.com wrote: > > no experience with nitrous, but what will the tank weigh and where will you > put it? The magazine crew installed the tank in a strap-down istallation in the Honda rear hatch/trunk space. The weight isn't listed (the difference between what car-people and plane-people consider significant), but the bottle looks fairly compact -- approximately like a home fire extinguisher... it could go easily in the rear fuselage of a Zodiac. I'm not about to install one right now, but in a couple of years.... when flying straight and level is getting boring and my engine is due for overhaul anyways... ;-) The more I think of it, the more I think that this is an equivalent to super-charging an engine. The advantage for an aircraft is that if it was used for a high-altitude application (i.e. mountain airports), you wouldn't over-stress the engine, but rather just regain some of the 'sea-level' performance from the engine. hmmm -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind(at)freemail.de>
Subject: Re: Tach Error
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Hi everybody, similar with my 601 (Rotax 912): I have an Engine Information System (EIS) and a tach from microflight. The RPM indication from the EIS and the tach show same RPM readings up to 3500 min-1. Above 3500 min-1 the needle of the Microflight tach just jumps all the way to the right stop, indicating more than 7000 min-1. EIS reads okay. I have replaced the tach already, run shielded wires from the RPM sensor to the instruemnts, tried the tach without the EIS connected, etc. with no success. Anybody with an idea? I also trying to find a telephone number from Microflight to ask them about that problem. Does anybody has a telephone number or an e-mail address from Microflight? Happy buidling / flying Thilo Kind ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wayne Beattie" <wyne.beattie(at)snet.net> Subject: Zenith-List: Tach Error > > I found an interesting way to increase the cruise speed of my 601 HDS. > Install a tach that reads properly. > > Over the winter I replaced my analog engine instruments with an EIS > unit. On the next flight takeoff I noticed that the digital tach was > only reading 4990 rpm on climbout when I remember getting at least 5200 > rpm on the old tach with a needle. In level flight with full throttle I > was only indicating 5200 rpm when I used to get 5600 rpm. The airspeed > was the same as I remember from my last flights at about 120 mph at that > setting (I'm at sea level). > > I did the usual checks of the engine and prop pitch (which I had not > changed since the last flight). > > Then I purchased one of those hand held tach checkers with the intent of > proving the EIS inacurate. What I found out was that the EIS is right > on. I borrowed another to verify the tach checker and it also showed the > EIS reading to be accurate. > > Conclusion is that the old tach was reading high all for the last 180 > hours and I was over pitched on the prop. > > I proceeded to adjust the propeller pitch to get 5600 rpm at full > throttle in level flight and now the aircraft indicates 130 mph at 5500 > rpm. An added benefit is climb increased by about 200 fpm as well. > > Now I cruise around at 120 mph and 5000 rpm. Saving gas and getting the > same airspeed I used to get. > > I may see the book value yet some day. If all this speed doesn't rip the > canopy off. > > Anyone out there going to Sentimental Journey to Lock Haven PA next > week? > > Wayne > > N601WB 912UL > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Ward" <adwsail(at)bigfoot.com>
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Subject: Re: Zodiac XL for Flight Simulator 2002
Sorry Paul, the link doesn't get you to a dl page. Just a link to the jpg image. On 15 Jun 2002 at 11:12, Paul Hartl wrote: > website ( http://home.mindspring.com/~pdhartl/ ), where you can > Paul Dale Ward WB4LIP Wooden Boat Cold Molding and Restoration Marine Electronic Systems Design adwsail(at)bigfoot.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randy L. Thwing" <n4546v(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: 701 gear
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Chuck: I learned to fly in a Cessna 140 and have owned a Maule M5-210-C. I like tailwheel airplanes. When I originally bought my 701 plans I bought and intended to build the tailwheel version. I called ZA, Canada, discussed my project, and they asked: "how can we talk you out of tailwheel?". Here's the reason: When a 701 sits in a tailwheel attitude, the wing has the positive AOA you think you want. When the aircraft is light, and has a liftoff speed of 25 mph, this means that when you are taxing at 13 mph, and a 12 mph wind gust comes along, you could become airborne wherever you might be, quite possibly in a very wrong place. I switched to nosedragger plans with the idea that the on the ground AOA would then be negative (as you are experiencing). This prevents liftoff any time your combined taxi/wind speed exceeds minimum takeoff airspeed. You will only leave the ground when YOU want to by bringing the wing (rotating) to a positive angle of attack. I think your 1 degree negative pitch attitude on tricycle gear sounds about right. OK Chuck, any thoughts? Randy L. Thwing, 701 plans, 48 Bonz, 59 C-150 > On the ground my 701 has a negative pitch attitude of about 1 degree. > It seems to me it should be at least level, if not up somewhat, to get > lift on the wing without rotation, which will be sudden as soon as the > wing gets to a positive angle of attack when the elevator becomes > effective. When landing the pitch will be well above level attitude at > touchdown. > > Any thoughts? > Chuck D. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)thegateway.net>
Subject: Re: 701 gear
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Randy, Thanks for the input. The lift-off angle of attack at 25 mph relative wind is probably more like 20 degrees, so taxing at one degree should not be too big a problem. The other thing I noticed when I flew ZAC's 701 was when I rotated it tended to rotate fast once it got started, kind of like right after the angle of attack got positive...this is an impression I have, but its been a year. Some other reasons to raise the nose are in the ZAC note below. I built my hanger based on the pre tundra gear 701 design height, the new height is 103" not 92" even though I built the hanger with some margins, but not enough, I'd have to put the nose wheel on a ramp to clear the rudder. Below is a message I sent to ZAC, it will be interesting what they have to say. note to ZAC When sitting on level ground my 701 is pitched down about one degree. I have checked all the landing gear and fuselage dimensions and they are good. I would like to add a spacer (about 50 mm) between the nose gear strut (7.L.1.1) and the nose gear fork (7.F.2.4) to raise the nose and have the wings about one degree up. My reasons for this are as follows: For soft and rough field takeoffs the wing will start more quickly take the load Rotation will be more controllable if started from a positive angle of attack For landing, the nose gear will not be forced down by the negative angle of attack The rudder will fit in my hanger (the roof is now a couple of inches too low) May I add a steel spacer to raise the nose? Any thoughts? Chuck D. PS check out my instrument panel at http://members.thegateway.net/cfd I thought you might like to see how I stiffened the .025 panel, without much added weight. On the front of the panel, there will be a row of 4 switches just above the fuses on the left bottom. The door to the map box is missing as is the intercom at bottom center of panel and the radio at the top. The dual CHT has two switches to select the front or rear cylinders. Yes, the throttle is a brass drawer knob. The mag switches are above the throttle, the key is the master and the start switch. Trim switch and boost pump switch are left of the throttle and the choke and carb heat are not there, just holes. The space above the map box is for a transponder one day. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 16, 2002
Subject: Fiberglass question
Hi, I hope this question is not too dumb, but I have to ask.When the fiberglass pieces are made by ZAC is the white coating on top paint? It doesn;t seem to be paint, because if a little piece does chip off, the chip always seems to be much deeper than just a a coat or two of spray paint. Or is the bottom layer a special glass that sets up like this when hardened. Now, I know this is probably a dumb question, but I have never done glass work before. And I know that ZAC is not terribly predisposed in "finishing" things so it surprises me that they would go to all of the trouble to sand and then paint the cowl bowls , when they could leave that tedious work for us builder. Why would they do the bowls and the saddle and not the tail light assembly? My guess is they use a different vendor for that piece. I hope not too many of you are rolling your eyes at me....I'm just trying to learn as I go! Steve Freeman ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Phil & Michele Miller <millerpg(at)ps.gen.nz>
Subject: Need more takeoff power?
Date: Jun 16, 2002
Chemical supercharging is exactly the correct term to use to describe NOx injection. If you want to know more, go to your local drag strip and ask around. Drag racers and street rodders have been using it for years. I think you will find that it provides a very limited duration power boost due to the size (weight) of the bottle you could reasonably carry. You need to understand that a boosted engine needs to be built to take the extra horsepower. You would be courting disaster if you simply bolted on an NOx installation. Cheers, Phil Miller New Zealand (912S CH701) -----Original Message----- From: Grant Corriveau [SMTP:grantC(at)total.net] Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Need more takeoff power? on 15/06/02 14:44, JEEdmondson(at)aol.com at JEEdmondson(at)aol.com wrote: > > no experience with nitrous, but what will the tank weigh and where will you > put it? The magazine crew installed the tank in a strap-down istallation in the Honda rear hatch/trunk space. The weight isn't listed (the difference between what car-people and plane-people consider significant), but the bottle looks fairly compact -- approximately like a home fire extinguisher... it could go easily in the rear fuselage of a Zodiac. I'm not about to install one right now, but in a couple of years.... when flying straight and level is getting boring and my engine is due for overhaul anyways... ;-) The more I think of it, the more I think that this is an equivalent to super-charging an engine. The advantage for an aircraft is that if it was used for a high-altitude application (i.e. mountain airports), you wouldn't over-stress the engine, but rather just regain some of the 'sea-level' performance from the engine. hmmm -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Phil & Michele Miller <millerpg(at)ps.gen.nz>
Subject: 701 Tyres
Date: Jun 16, 2002
Hi, list, There are 2 701's flying in my area and both seem to suffer the same problem. The ZAC supplied tyres are so incredibly out-of-balance that you can feel a "shimmy" in the landing gear on take-off as you leave the ground. A touch on the brakes stops wheel rotation and the "shimmy" in the mains. I have watched my friend's 701 closely from the ground as he takes off and the nosewheel leg can be clearly seen shimmying in a rapid fore and aft motion due to tyre imbalance. I don't believe the supplied tyres were ever intended for aircraft use or the takeoff/landing speeds we subject them to so balancing probably isn't an issue. Does anyone know where I can get a more suitable tyre for this application? Many thanks, Phil Miller New Zealand (912S 701) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: 701 Tyres
Date: Jun 16, 2002
Phil, The Michelin tires for motor scooters are a great quality tire for the 601. I've got S83s that are 350-8 to fit the wheels provided for it. Don't know if the 701 wheels are the same, but would guess that this would be an area you can check. Larry McFarland 601hds at http://www.macsmachine.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil & Michele Miller" <millerpg(at)ps.gen.nz> Subject: Zenith-List: 701 Tyres > > Hi, list, > Does anyone know where I can get a more suitable tyre for this > application? > > Many thanks, > Phil Miller > New Zealand > (912S 701) > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass question
Date: Jun 16, 2002
> I hope this question is not too dumb, but I have to ask.When the fiberglass > pieces are made by ZAC is the white coating on top paint? It doesn;t seem to > be paint, because if a little piece does chip off, the chip always seems to > be much deeper than just a a coat or two of spray paint. Or is the bottom > layer a special glass that sets up like this when hardened. It isn't paint, it is gel coat. I think it is part of the manufacturing process to keep the piece from sticking to the molds. You should know that the factory would never do anything to make our lives easier. :-) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 16, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Re: 701 Tyres
The nose wheel on my HDS (stock ZAC tires) had a significant shimmy after liftoff. I took the wheel off and balanced it using stick on wheel weights that I purchased at a motorcycle shop. No more shimmy!! Both of my main gear didi not have a shimmy problem. By the way, I now have 223 landings (99% on hard surfaced runways) with the stock ZAC tires and there is substantial tread left. The takeoff / landing speeds are significantly higher in the HDS than the 701 and these tires have not been a problem for me so far. Regards, Bill >I don't believe the supplied tyres were ever intended for aircraft use or >the takeoff/landing speeds we subject them to so balancing probably isn't >an issue. Does anyone know where I can get a more suitable tyre for this >application? > >Many thanks, >Phil Miller >New Zealand >(912S 701) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 16, 2002
From: Scott and Valeree Stout <the_stouts(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 801: Routing Return Fuel Lines and Venting Tanks...
Hello all... What have the 801 folks done about routing return fuel lines within the wings? Also, with regards to venting the tanks, how are folks planning on doing this? Thanx... -Scott ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Tanner" <vk3auu(at)vic.australis.com.au>
Subject: Re: Need more takeoff power?
Date: Jun 17, 2002
Further to my previous posting on this subject. I have had some experience with laboratory equipment using a butane - nitrous oxide burner. This produces a flame hot enough to decompose aluminium oxide. Unless your pistons and exhaust valves are designed to withstand considerably elevated combustion chamber temperatures, I would suggest that you are treading a very dangerous path. David Tanner ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass question
Date: Jun 16, 2002
Steve, I often make parts of Polyester resin and coat last with epoxy to toughen it up. Gel coat is different, like the earlier Corvettes. It does tend to chip easily with age. Suggest you paint the part with epoxy paint to reduce the prospect of chipping. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: <STEFREE(at)aol.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Fiberglass question > > Hi, > > I hope this question is not too dumb, but I have to ask.When the fiberglass > pieces are made by ZAC is the white coating on top paint? It doesn;t seem to > be paint, because if a little piece does chip off, the chip always seems to > be much deeper than just a a coat or two of spray paint. Or is the bottom > layer a special glass that sets up like this when hardened. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Townsend" <mark.townsend(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass question
Date: Jun 15, 2002
Actually the Gel Coat is applied after the part is removed from the mold. It is used as a finisher that requires little sanding or prepping to accept paint. Gel coat is also a stiffener and filler which allows the fiberglass part to retain it's shape better and fill the voids. It is quite expensive and a real pain to apply. But is a sign of a quality part. Mark Townsend 601XL EA-82MPFI Turbo -----Original Message----- From: STEFREE(at)aol.com <STEFREE(at)aol.com> Date: Sunday, June 16, 2002 3:02 AM Subject: Zenith-List: Fiberglass question > >Hi, > >I hope this question is not too dumb, but I have to ask.When the fiberglass >pieces are made by ZAC is the white coating on top paint? It doesn;t seem to >be paint, because if a little piece does chip off, the chip always seems to >be much deeper than just a a coat or two of spray paint. Or is the bottom >layer a special glass that sets up like this when hardened. > >Now, I know this is probably a dumb question, but I have never done glass >work before. And I know that ZAC is not terribly predisposed in "finishing" >things so it surprises me that they would go to all of the trouble to sand >and then paint the cowl bowls , when they could leave that tedious work for >us builder. Why would they do the bowls and the saddle and not the tail >light assembly? My guess is they use a different vendor for that piece. > >I hope not too many of you are rolling your eyes at me....I'm just trying to >learn as I go! > >Steve Freeman > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass question
Date: Jun 16, 2002
Normally the gel coat is the first layer sprayed or rolled into a Male mold. The rest of the lay-up is then done. It provides the exterior finish of the piece. Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Townsend" <mark.townsend(at)sympatico.ca> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fiberglass question Actually the Gel Coat is applied after the part is removed from the mold. It is used as a finisher that requires little sanding or prepping to accept paint. Gel coat is also a stiffener and filler which allows the fiberglass part to retain it's shape better and fill the voids. It is quite expensive and a real pain to apply. But is a sign of a quality part. Mark Townsend 601XL EA-82MPFI Turbo -----Original Message----- From: STEFREE(at)aol.com <STEFREE(at)aol.com> Date: Sunday, June 16, 2002 3:02 AM Subject: Zenith-List: Fiberglass question > >Hi, > >I hope this question is not too dumb, but I have to ask.When the fiberglass >pieces are made by ZAC is the white coating on top paint? It doesn;t seem to >be paint, because if a little piece does chip off, the chip always seems to >be much deeper than just a a coat or two of spray paint. Or is the bottom >layer a special glass that sets up like this when hardened. > >Now, I know this is probably a dumb question, but I have never done glass >work before. And I know that ZAC is not terribly predisposed in "finishing" >things so it surprises me that they would go to all of the trouble to sand >and then paint the cowl bowls , when they could leave that tedious work for >us builder. Why would they do the bowls and the saddle and not the tail >light assembly? My guess is they use a different vendor for that piece. > >I hope not too many of you are rolling your eyes at me....I'm just trying to >learn as I go! > >Steve Freeman > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randy L. Thwing" <n4546v(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Generator output ratings
Date: Jun 16, 2002
Dear listers: Among the various flying junk I'm involved with, two fellow EAA Chapter Members and myself have a 1959 Cessna 150 equipped with a Delco-Remy 20 amp generator. Can anyone (You're up Cy) advise if there is a standard/specification stating what RPM is required to achieve the 20 amp rated output? There must be one, but what is it? This is slightly off topic but I did gaze at my 701 rear fuselage before typing this query! Regards, Randy L. Thwing, 701 plans, Las Vegas, NV ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Generator output ratings
Date: Jun 17, 2002
The only reference to the generator I can find in the C-75, C-85 Continental manual is 3700 rpm with 14 amps out put at 15 volts. in a 1946. The drive ratio is 2.035 to 1 so 3700/2.035=1818.18 rpm. I presume this is unregulated. Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy L. Thwing" <n4546v(at)mindspring.com> Subject: Zenith-List: Generator output ratings Dear listers: Among the various flying junk I'm involved with, two fellow EAA Chapter Members and myself have a 1959 Cessna 150 equipped with a Delco-Remy 20 amp generator. Can anyone (You're up Cy) advise if there is a standard/specification stating what RPM is required to achieve the 20 amp rated output? There must be one, but what is it? This is slightly off topic but I did gaze at my 701 rear fuselage before typing this query! Regards, Randy L. Thwing, 701 plans, Las Vegas, NV ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61(at)birch.net>
Subject: Re: Smaller 601 Tyres?
Date: Jun 17, 2002
> Anyone have any ideas on smaller wheels/tyres for the 601? > I would imagine that would provide a few extra knots. > Perry Morrison > ++ Bill Morelli is correct, I am using the same size tires as typically found on Cessna 152's (5.00 X 5). I think the new XL is using this size. I first saw them on a 601 several years ago at a builders house in Overland Park Kansas and liked the appearance of the smaller wheels and tires considering the small size of the 601. All that was required to do it was to have Zenith build the landing gear struts just a little bit longer so the plane would still sit the same height off the ground for prop clearance reasons. It's been a while back, but I think the legs of the struts wound up being 2" longer. There is a picture that probably a number of you have seen of a blue and white painted XL. Take a look at the very small tires and wheel pants. I plan to use those much smaller type wheel pants as well. Will the smaller size tires and wheel pants provide a few extra knots as Perry suggested?....I'm sure hoping so! Fred Area 41 Snailworks ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pinneo, George" <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com>
Subject: Rudder Pedal Failure
Date: Jun 17, 2002
I have 382 hours on my 601 HDS, 912, trigear. On 6/15/02, the pilot's left pedal failed, bending forward under my left foot as I attempted to exit the runway after landing. I spun back onto the runway into the path of an airplane that had just started the takeoff run. I yelped into the microphone; he aborted, fortunately. I went around in a very small right circle and had to shut down and get out to clear the jammed pedal and pull my aircraft off the runway. No injuries; some adrenaline; another "free lesson". My pedals, 1994 vintage, are .035" diam. 4130 chromoly tube; the weld distorted and broke almost 300 degrees around the T-weld. I spoke w/ Nicholas this AM. The current ones use .058" diam. 4130 tubing. If your pedals are not .058" thick tubing, refer to the May/June 1998 Zenair News for a fix. I don't think we fly w/ very much force on the pedals. However, spinning back into traffic after a landing can still ruin your day. Consider reinforcing your pedals before you have to do what I did. GGP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kilby, Roger" <Roger.Kilby(at)DynCorp.com>
Subject: Flying IFR inyour 601...
Date: Jun 17, 2002
I put a turn coordinator in my 601 just to have a simple gyro in case of emergency type thing. The 601 can certainly be IFR certified and flown as such. If you are talking about getting through a thin layer then no problem but I would not like to spend serious time IFR in a 601 for the same reason I wouldn't in a Cessna 152.....they are just too light. You will feel every bump which makes for a lot of work when IFR. Another 601 consideration is the center yoke. If your radios are mounted in the center panel and you do not have an autopilot, you will have a greater workload when IFR. Regardless of the aircraft, do yourself a favor and get the instrument rating. You will be a better pilot for it. I have flown actual or simulated IFR in everything from 152s to various turboprops as well as taught as a CFII but remember this is ...just my 2 cents...... Roger Kilby N98RK 601HDS ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 17, 2002
From: John Thompson <rcav8r(at)chorus.net>
Subject: Fiberglass question
Um, wrong. The gel coat is applied first in a mold. Its basically a thickened coat of resin that is laid in the mold first. When thats cured a little bit, the first layers of glass/mat are put in, then resin brushed into that, repeating the glass / resin as required. Applying a "gel coat" AFTER pulling the part isn't going to do much good. You will wind up having to sand this outer gell coat to smooth it out. One of the reasons for the gel coat in the first place is to help fill in smaller nooks and crannies (not too likely on a aircraft cowl) and give it the smooth outer finish. Obviously the mold has to be very smooth first to get a smooth finish...there is only so much you can do with release wax. Wax might fill most small pin holes, but for airbubbles, nicks and dings, you will have to fill in the hole and polish it down by hand. But thats more than most folks need to know. The bottom line is, the smooth outer part is a gel coat, applied FIRST in a molded fiberglass part. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pinneo, George" <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com>
Subject: Fiberglass vs epoxy composite construction
Date: Jun 17, 2002
EPOXY/glass composite shells for aircraft, or anything else, are stronger than polyester fiberglass. You can epoxy/glass to Zenith, or anyone else's shells or fairings, w/ W.E.S.T. or System 3 epoxies. You can sand the outer surface smooth, the only surface that is seen, and paint it w/ urethane for an excellent surface, wet-look etc. It's less liable to chip or nick from gravel thrown up, on wheelpants, and it's easier to paint. Epoxies cost a little more than polyesters, but bond much better, always. Gelcoat, put in the mold first, is fine for some boats, but some luxury yacht-builders dropped gelcoats a good decade ago in favor of sanded, linear urethane painted surfaces. GGP ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 17, 2002
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Re: 801: Routing Return Fuel Lines and Venting
Tanks... > > >Hello all... > >What have the 801 folks done about routing return fuel lines within the >wings? Also, with regards to venting the tanks, how are folks planning >on doing this? Return fuel lines are only needed for fuel injection engines. Not many have put this kind of engine on an 801 yet, so they simply plug the return vent with the supplied plug. The wing tank vents are in the caps - these are the Piper vented caps that you must make sure are kept clear. It is possible to vent the tanks like Bingelis talks about, but I don't know of anyone doing this yet. If someone is venting them differently, I would like to hear about it as well. Gary Liming 801 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 17, 2002
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Need more takeoff power?
Besides the consideration of possible engine damage using chemical boosts, which is certainly possible, I would like to ask the question about why more power is truly needed. For the 701 and 801, which are designed with lift foremost in mind, and drag second, more power is not really going to change the cruise speed very much, is it? It might change your climb speed, though, but don't you already have more climb than just about anything else on your field in a 701 or 801? Anyone know if this argument holds true for the thick airfoil 601s as well? Gary Liming ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Ward" <adwsail(at)bigfoot.com>
Date: Jun 17, 2002
Subject: Re: Fiberglass question
Before too much mis-information gets spread around, gelcoat is the FIRST material coating that goes on/in a mold. It is a thick "paint" constitency and normally colored. Cloth and resin then follow. Virtually all fiberglass boats are gelcoated, that's the surface you normally see. It also is a slight bit better as a vapor barrier than straight fiberglass/resin but nowhere near as good as an epoxy barrier. Done right it eliminates the need to paint the surface, just give it a good coat of wax. It is a sign of quality as opposed to raw glass. On 15 Jun 2002 at 20:22, Mark Townsend wrote: > > Actually the Gel Coat is applied after the part is removed from the mold. It > is used as a finisher that requires little sanding or prepping to accept > paint. Gel coat is also a stiffener and filler which allows the fiberglass > part to retain it's shape better and fill the voids. It is quite expensive > and a real pain to apply. But is a sign of a quality part. > > Mark Townsend > 601XL EA-82MPFI Turbo > > -----Original Message----- > From: STEFREE(at)aol.com <STEFREE(at)aol.com> > To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com > Date: Sunday, June 16, 2002 3:02 AM > Subject: Zenith-List: Fiberglass question > > > > > >Hi, > > > >I hope this question is not too dumb, but I have to ask.When the fiberglass > >pieces are made by ZAC is the white coating on top paint? It doesn;t seem > to > >be paint, because if a little piece does chip off, the chip always seems to > >be much deeper than just a a coat or two of spray paint. Or is the bottom > >layer a special glass that sets up like this when hardened. > > > >Now, I know this is probably a dumb question, but I have never done glass > >work before. And I know that ZAC is not terribly predisposed in "finishing" > >things so it surprises me that they would go to all of the trouble to sand > >and then paint the cowl bowls , when they could leave that tedious work for > >us builder. Why would they do the bowls and the saddle and not the tail > >light assembly? My guess is they use a different vendor for that piece. > > > >I hope not too many of you are rolling your eyes at me....I'm just trying > to > >learn as I go! > > > >Steve Freeman > > > > > > > > > > Dale Ward WB4LIP Wooden Boat Cold Molding and Restoration Marine Electronic Systems Design adwsail(at)bigfoot.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pinneo, George" <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com>
Subject: Need more takeoff power?
Date: Jun 17, 2002
I've seen no issues with takeoff power on my 912 601 HDS! At least up to 6,500' MSL. GGP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bruce Bockius" <bruce(at)whiteantelopesoftware.com>
Subject: Need more takeoff power?
Date: Jun 17, 2002
> Besides the consideration of possible engine damage using > chemical boosts, > which is certainly possible, I would like to ask the question > about why > more power is truly needed. Well, when I take off from LXV Leadville, Colorado at a density altitude of >11,000ft, I wouldn't mind having some sort of turbonormalizing to restore my takeoff power to that of sea level. > For the 701 and 801, which are designed with lift foremost in > mind, and > drag second, more power is not really going to change the > cruise speed very > much, is it? It might change your climb speed, though, but don't you > already have more climb than just about anything else on your > field in a > 701 or 801? > > Anyone know if this argument holds true for the thick airfoil > 601s as well? It definitely does for a 601HD at least... Which is why I can still takeoff from Leadville! -Bruce/601HD/Stratus/TDO/305 hrs/Currently grounded due to wildfire smoke ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 17, 2002
From: Larry Shull <larryshu(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: NOS
Every one seems concerned about how much damage or how much HP can be gotten from nitrous oxide injection. Has anyone thought how you would apply that power to the air with a fixed pitch prop? Doesn't seem to me that you wqould gain much unless you changed the prop pitch to take advantage of the increased power, but if you do that then you would have to use the nitros for each takeoff. Have any of you actually used NOS on an engine? It is pretty expensive HP. You would be far better off using a bigger engine or turbocharging what you have than going to nitros for an increase in HP. The torbo will be there all of the time and the weight penalty would be less than the nitros setup would be. Run out of NOS 3/4 way down the runway and you have just lunched an engine, not a plesant thought is it? Larry Shull ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net>
Subject: 601 Horizontal stab
Date: Jun 17, 2002
I just did the first fit of the horizontal stabilizer for my 601 and the leading edge of the nose skin just touches bulkhead B6 (6F11-1). With the rear stabilizer attachments snug against the 6F2-7 brackets on the fuselage, there's a small gap between the front stab attachments and the 6F2-8 fuselage brackets, so it looks like I could slide it back a bit if necessary by using some shims. Is this what everybody else has found? Is the nose skin in contact with B6, or almost so? Thanks for any help. Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 17, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Cracked washers on motor mounts
Well, I hope this is the last of my crack stories!!! (boy that sounds kind of weird!!) Me, my HDS and Stratus are back in the air with a repaired alternator mount and a repaired and reinforced upper right motor mount. One more thing I would like to share is the fact that when I was removing the motor mount, I found the penny washers that are up against the rubber motor mounts (on the front side) distorted. I pulled them off one at a time and replaced them with thicker washers. At least one of the washers was cracked. There are also these same type washers between the rear of the rubber mounts and the engine mount but those were OK. I replaced these thin ZAC supplied washers with thicker ones. I have added some text and photos to my web site (see below) that describe and show the washers (distorted and cracked). Just click on construction and then engine mount fail. I also added a couple of photos of my repaired, reinforced and repainted motor mount. Regards, Bill (N812BM - HDS - Tri - Stratus - Vermont - 143.4 flight hrs. - 223 landings) web site -> http://homepages.together.net/~billvt/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "patrick walsh" <pwalsh4539(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: 601 Horizontal stab
Date: Jun 17, 2002
yep...I had to shim the frot brackets out on the fuse just a little.... I just did the first fit of the horizontal stabilizer for my 601 and the leading edge of the nose skin just touches bulkhead B6 (6F11-1). With the rear stabilizer attachments snug against the 6F2-7 brackets on the fuselage, there's a small gap between the front stab attachments and the 6F2-8 fuselage brackets, = = = = Get mor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry C. McFarland" <larrymc(at)qconline.com>
Subject: Re: 601 Horizontal stab
Date: Jun 17, 2002
Bill, I have my stabilizer right up against the B6, mostly to put much needed space between the elevator and rudder. Yes, an .060 shim was made that wraps outside the forward mount angle, behind and across the rear and around the outside of the other. This is a rather tight fit so my stabilizer is within 1/8" of the rear top skin. Hope you made the elevator to the later dimensions shown on the AutoCAD drawings. They were 80mm at the rudder opening and now are shown to be 100mm+ I had to redo the rudder clearance there to get the rudder to swing freely. Larry McFarland - 601hds at http://www.macsmachine.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Steer" <bsteer(at)gwi.net> Subject: Zenith-List: 601 Horizontal stab > > I just did the first fit of the horizontal stabilizer for my 601 and the leading > edge of the nose skin just touches bulkhead B6 (6F11-1). With the rear > stabilizer attachments snug against the 6F2-7 brackets on the fuselage, there's > a small gap between the front stab attachments and the 6F2-8 fuselage brackets, > so it looks like I could slide it back a bit if necessary by using some shims. > Is this what everybody else has found? Is the nose skin in contact with B6, or > almost so? > > Thanks for any help. > > Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Benford2(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 18, 2002
Subject: NOS
I have had plenty of experience with nitrous oxide and it is something a plane does not need. If density altitude is your problem just leave earlier in the day. The one guy wrote that is you run out of NOS half way down the runway you will lunch your motor is not correct. All that will happen is you will run way too rich because the fuel jet is still feeding the intake when there is no chemical supercharging going on. Ben Haas. 801 builder/N801BH. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: flat again!
Date: Jun 18, 2002
Yesterday I replaced the tube in my right main again. I went flying for a few hours and ended up landing on a flat main. This is the 3rd time that tire has gone flat. I took the tire off today and inspected the rim. I found some sharp spots on the rims. So the lesson to this story is to inspect those factory rims carefully before assembling your wheels. Now the questions is, should I send Zenith a bill for 3 tubes, lots of labor, and being unable to use my airplane for a week, oh yeah, and for endangering my life by selling me defective products. Philip A. Polstra Certified Flight Instructor - Airplane Single Engine; Instrument Airplane Ground Instructor - Advanced; Instrument NAFI Instructor http://www.philsflying.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 18, 2002
From: Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com>
Subject: 801 elevator design
On the weekend I was at the aviation show in Oshawa, Ontario, Canada, and had a brief look at the red and white Flypass 801 demonstrator, the one with the Walter-LOM engine. The 801 had spanwise extensions on the elevator that weren't there a couple years ago. Maybe 5 inches extra on each side. There were no extensions to the fixed horizontal stabilizer, and the elevator extensions projected ahead of the hinge line but not as far as the leading edge of the horizontal stab. I overheard one pilot of the aircraft say that he found the extensions helped a lot in some conditions. If you'll excuse these abrupt comments, it looks like Chris Heintz could be a little less frugal with tail area on his designs. Elevator power and/or pitch stability have been issues in the past for the 601 HD and 701. I personally have no idea how this one aircraft's mods have anything to do with how other 801's are being built. Peter Chapman Toronto, ON 601 HDS / 912 / C-GZDC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 18, 2002
From: Fred Poor <fredspoor2002(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 801 elevator design
If you'll excuse these abrupt comments, it looks like Chris Heintz could be a little less frugal with tail area on his designs. Elevator power and/or pitch stability have been issues in the past for the 601 HD and 701 --- Peter Chapman wrote: Proper use of throttle along with elevator control is a must when landing the 701. I would imagine the 801, 601 HDS and HD would be landed the same way as they all have a lot of drag.-- Why bash Chris, with all he has done for the homebuilder-- A lot of us would not be flying if it weren't for him. My hat is off to Chris.---"Fred" do not archieve > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/search > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: flat again!
Date: Jun 18, 2002
> > Now the questions is, should I send Zenith a bill for 3 tubes, lots of > > labor, and being unable to use my airplane for a week, oh yeah, and for > > endangering my life by selling me defective products. > > > > Well, you can send 'em a bill, but I'd suggest not holding your breath. > After all, YOU manufactured the plane, right? :) > Yes, I did manufacture the plane, but they manufactured some of the parts. :-) I really am glad that I didn't have a flat with their cheasy tires, or I would have to replace the rims. Good thing is that the rims don't touch the ground with the tires I have now, that wasn't the case with the factory tires. Does anyone have an idea why they have different rims on the mains? The nosegear is easy to change with the split rims, but the mains are really difficult. Also, it is hard to use a tube in the mains with a straight valve since there is no clearance. I don't see a reason why the discs couldn't be welded to the type rims on the nosegear. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Townsend" <mark.townsend(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: 801 elevator design
Date: Jun 17, 2002
HI Peter First Off the 801 you saw at the Show belongs to Art from Flypass. That particular plane was the test design for alot of mods and for Arts input to Chris. Art came up with the idea to enlarge the elevator in order to allow for shorter field take-off. Which is needed in Arts desire to help out 3rd world countries. For the Full info on the modification and reason Contact Art at Flypass. Chris only gave his blessing for this modification he didn't design it. Mark Townsend 601XL EA-82MPFI Turbo -----Original Message----- From: Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com> Date: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 7:51 PM Subject: Zenith-List: 801 elevator design > >On the weekend I was at the aviation show in Oshawa, Ontario, Canada, and >had a brief look at the red and white Flypass 801 demonstrator, the one >with the Walter-LOM engine. > >The 801 had spanwise extensions on the elevator that weren't there a couple >years ago. Maybe 5 inches extra on each side. There were no >extensions to the fixed horizontal stabilizer, and the elevator extensions >projected ahead of the hinge line but not as far as the leading edge of the >horizontal stab. I overheard one pilot of the aircraft say that he found >the extensions helped a lot in some conditions. > >If you'll excuse these abrupt comments, it looks like Chris Heintz could be >a little less frugal with tail area on his designs. Elevator power and/or >pitch stability have been issues in the past for the 601 HD and 701. I >personally have no idea how this one aircraft's mods have anything to do >with how other 801's are being built. > > >Peter Chapman >Toronto, ON 601 HDS / 912 / C-GZDC > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 19, 2002
From: Cleone Markwell <cleone(at)rr1.net>
Subject: brakes
Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking power. I can only hold the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? cleone(at)rr1.net ch601hd 125hrs ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Weston, Jim" <Jim.Weston(at)delta.com>
Subject: brakes
Date: Jun 19, 2002
Mine does the same thing. I can hold about 3200 rpm on the Stratus engine before the plane starts to creep forward. I suppose that I could get more braking, but it has always felt like I might overstress the pedals if I push much harder. Perhaps this is why there have been a number of rudder pedal failures. Maybe others push as needed (high need) for braking. I was thinking, just this morning, about a design for converting the brakes to a single pull handle; like on the old Piper Tri-Pacers. Jim Weston McDonough, Ga. -----Original Message----- From: Cleone Markwell [mailto:cleone(at)rr1.net] Subject: Zenith-List: brakes Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking power. I can only hold the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? cleone(at)rr1.net ch601hd 125hrs ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 19, 2002
I can't hold my Stratus-powered hds still past 3000 rpm, so your experience is normal. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cleone Markwell" <cleone(at)rr1.net> Subject: Zenith-List: brakes > > Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking power. I can only hold > the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? cleone(at)rr1.net ch601hd > 125hrs > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 19, 2002
From: Peter Chapman <pchapman(at)ionsys.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
At 14:14 19-06-02 , you wrote: >Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking power. I can only hold >the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? cleone(at)rr1.net ch601hd Similar here. 601HDS Rotax 912. The problem appears not to be with the brakes but the rudder pedal geometry -- poor leverage on the brake pistons. Peter Chapman Toronto, ON ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pinneo, George" <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com>
Subject: brakes
Date: Jun 19, 2002
Yep! I use 3,000 rpm for runup. GGP ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 19, 2002
From: Steven Kay <skay(at)optonline.net>
Subject: [Fwd: Zenair aircraft pedal - SB]
by mstr3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.0 Patch 2 (built Dec 14 2000)) with ESMTP id <0GXY004OJJ5I9T(at)mstr3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for skay@ims-ms-daemon (209-193-47-105-adsl-rb1.fai.acsalaska.net [209.193.47.105]) by mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 (built Feb 21 2002)) with SMTP id <0GXY00JFHJ5C02(at)mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for skay(at)optonline.net ([216.209.18.122] helo=celeron266a) by frodo.csolve.net with smtp (Exim 4.02) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:20:48 -0400 From: "Wayne G. O'Shea" <oifa(at)irishfield.on.ca> Subject: Zenair aircraft pedal - SB Hi Gang! Just thought I should throw this one out before someone "packs it in" and since I have known about this problem for years I would feel like shit if I wasn't proactive and passed it on again. If someone is on a 701/601 mail list you may want to pass it on as well. Had the customer leave his keys up under his Stab so they were handy for both of us, after he returned from the cottage last weekend, so I could do a few minor cooling adjustments to finish up the engine upgrade on his Pegastol (CH701 variant). When I grabbed the keys the other day I found it strange that his rudder cables looked loose, considering that I had just rigged everything a week earlier when I had reinstalled his amphibs. I knew what to look for right away, since I have welded the pedals back together on 2 other 701's over the years. Sure enough his right rudder pedal was cracked at the angle butt weld, between the pilots pedal post and the cross tube to the passenger pedals, and was deformed enough to allow the pilot and passenger pedal to be torsionally misaligned letting the cable go loose (as the right pilot pedal is held by the nose wheel push rod). This is a problem I discussed with Chris Heinz about 4 years ago and to the best of my knowledge the design has never been changed. The pedal assemblies are welded together without any reinforcing straps or gussets added to the joint. You can get away with this on a taildragger, but apparently not with the positive steering nose wheel on the Zenair series as the pedals will not take the load of starting to turn the aircraft while taxing (before you get it moving forward). Especially when running the turf tires, or the amphib gears nose wheel extension. If you are flying a Zenair be vigilant and do a thorough inspection of your pedal assemblies, with lots of light shining under the panel, before further flight. If you ever notice a loose cable, don't ignore it and immediately inspect the pedal assemblies again. This is one design that is not forgiving when a pedal breaks off, thanks to the all flying rudder/fin (another reason not to like it besides the ones Mike Davies mentioned in the Rec Flyer article!). When the pedal breaks off the rudder will peg itself full to one side and you have a couple of options. Apply full opposite stick and side slip into the nearest cow pasture, OR If the left pedal breaks off reach down and pull the cable tight with your left hand to center the rudder and fly the plane to the next landing area. If the right pedal breaks off, get your foot WAY over on the passengers right pedal or get you passenger to do so for you and land at first opportunity! Remember, if something doesn't look right, or sound right, it isn't!! Safe flying ladies and gentlemen, Wayne G. O'Shea Life #533 To unsubscribe go to http://www.dcsol.com:81/public/listserv.htm Archives located at http://rebel:builder@www.dcsol.com:81/default.htm To contact the list admin, e-mail mike.davis(at)dcsol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)thegateway.net>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 19, 2002
It is definitely a brake pedal geometry problem. See Zenair News Letter Sept/Oct 2000 #120. Also Claude Prathey modified his pedals to improve the mechanical advantage of the pedals. Chuck D. > Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking power. I can only hold > the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? cleone(at)rr1.net ch601hd > 125hrs ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 19, 2002
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Zenair aircraft pedal - SB]
>Hi Gang! Just thought I should throw this one out before someone "packs it >in" > >This is a problem I discussed with Chris Heinz about 4 years ago and to the >best of my knowledge the design has never been changed. The pedal assemblies >are welded together without any reinforcing straps or gussets added to the >joint. I thought this was addressed in that they now use a thicker tubing. Is this not the case? Gary Liming ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61(at)birch.net>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Zenair aircraft pedal - SB]
Date: Jun 19, 2002
> I thought this was addressed in that they now use a thicker tubing. Is > this not the case? > > Gary Liming ++ When I read about this in the Zenith newsletter I called Nick. He said that if your pedals were the earlier thickness, that you should add the gusset as shown in the newsletter. If yours are the thicker wall version, the gussets are not necessary. Fred Area 41 Snailworks ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Ashford" <kimojima(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 20, 2002
My experience is the same, with a 912 I do my mag check at 3800 RPM after I pull on to the active. There has been a thread on this in the past-stock brakes as supplied with the 601 kit are at best MARGINAL. Jim Ashford 601 HDS tri, 912 http://www.hotmail.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 19, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Matco now offers a piece you can insert in your master cylinder to increase the compression and therefore, the braking power. See: http://www.matcomfg.com/intensifier.htm Michel --- Cleone Markwell wrote: > > > Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking > power. I can only hold > the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? > cleone(at)rr1.net ch601hd > 125hrs > > > > Contributions of > any other form > > latest messages. > other List members. > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/search > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Damien Graham" <dgraham7(at)twcny.rr.com>
Subject: Canopy Hook Extensions
Date: Jun 19, 2002
I do not remember if it was mentioned during the discussion about canopies blowing off the 601, but Art Mitchell (Flypass) told me that Zenith now offers bolt-on extensions for the hooks . I ordered a set of four. The cost is $41.90, including shipping. I will let you all know how it looks after the installation. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ZodiacBuilder(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 20, 2002
Subject: Re: brakes
In a message dated 6/19/2002 2:18:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, cleone(at)rr1.net writes: > Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking power. I can only hold > the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? cleone(at)rr1.net ch601hd > 125hrs > I solved that problem by using Cleveland brakes and wheels (500x5). They hold the 0-200 up to full power without any real effort. John W. Tarabocchia Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html N6042T 70hrs Flown..... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ZodiacBuilder(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 20, 2002
Subject: Re: brakes
In a message dated 6/19/2002 8:04:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, cfd(at)thegateway.net writes: > It is definitely a brake pedal geometry problem. > See Zenair News Letter Sept/Oct 2000 #120. > Also Claude Prathey modified his pedals to improve the mechanical advantage > of the pedals That's what I thought too. But it didn't improve the braking by much. You need to get a larger caliper and disk area. Something very similar to the wheels and brakes used on the 601XL. Which are after market copies of the Cleveland brakes and wheels. John W. Tarabocchia Web Site: http://hometown.aol.com/zodiacbuilder/Home.html N6042T 70hrs Flown..... ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Brake Modification to Boost Holding Power
From: charles.long(at)gm.com
Date: Jun 20, 2002
06/20/2002 09:41:15 AM I would be interesting in builder feedback on this change. Is anyone flying with this modification? From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: brakes Matco now offers a piece you can insert in your master cylinder to increase the compression and therefore, the braking power. See: http://www.matcomfg.com/intensifier.htm Michel --- Cleone Markwell wrote: > > > Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking > power. I can only hold > the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? > cleone(at)rr1.net ch601hd > 125hrs ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 20, 2002
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Zenair aircraft pedal - SB]
--- Fred or Sandy Hulen wrote: > Hulen" > > > I thought this was addressed in that they now use > a thicker tubing. Is > > this not the case? > > > > Gary Liming > > > ++ When I read about this in the Zenith newsletter I > called Nick. He said > that if your pedals were the earlier thickness, that > you should add the > gusset as shown in the newsletter. If yours are the > thicker wall version, > the gussets are not necessary. > > Fred > > Area 41 Snailworks > I have a friend that is building a (Steve Wittman) Tailwind and uses a similar type of pedals, they also have a modification with gussets that now is mandatory (I think) in all the old and new planes. They weld a gusset that goes around the lower tube up to the pedal tube both sides. I am seriously this reinforcement in our project, is not dificult. Saludos Gary Gower ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 20, 2002
From: John Mireley <glcompair(at)mireley.tcimet.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List Digest: 18 Msgs - 06/19/02
>> >>Hi listers, I feel that I should have more braking power. I can only hold >>the plane still up to 3500 rpm. Is that normal? cleone(at)rr1.net > I've been told that plastic brake lines are a problem source for achieving maximum performance from a braking system. -- John Mireley ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pinneo, George" <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List Digest: 18 Msgs - 06/19/02
Date: Jun 20, 2002
Not so; Matco recommends .035" 1/4" tubing. Call 'em and see! GGP ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 20, 2002
From: Cleone Markwell <cleone(at)rr1.net>
Subject: Brake intensifiers
Hi CH 601HD Listers who want more braking power; I have just talked with the people at Matco who make these brakes and If you have the brakes with the resevoir on the cylinder it is a MC5 and they must install the intensifiers free for you and test them for about $10 each plus postage. You may talk with them at: 801 486 7574. I am going to try this route. Thanks for all the interest. It sounds like this is a universal problem. Cleone Markwell 128 hrs of fun flying the HD with the 912 UL. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 20, 2002
> As long as they can withstand the pressure, it makes no difference what the > lines are made of. The same force will be applied to the brake pads. The > only difference might be the response time because of the elasticity of the > lines, but the difference would be so slight you would never notice it. I don't really know about these brakes, but on motorcycles there is a noticable difference switching from stock rubber lines to braided steel lines. Better response and more force. Gary K. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com>
Subject: Re: Brake intensifiers
Date: Jun 20, 2002
I think there is also the option of adding another caliper to each wheel. Matco has a dual caliper mounting plate, and a line is run from the bleeder on the first caliper to the input of the second. Gary K. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cleone Markwell" <cleone(at)rr1.net> Subject: Zenith-List: Brake intensifiers > > Hi CH 601HD Listers who want more braking power; > I have just talked with the people at Matco who make these brakes and If > you have the brakes with the resevoir on the cylinder it is a MC5 and they > must install the intensifiers free for you and test them for about $10 each > plus postage. You may talk with them at: 801 486 7574. I am going to try > this route. Thanks for all the interest. It sounds like this is a > universal problem. Cleone Markwell > 128 hrs of fun flying the HD with the 912 UL. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com>
Subject: Re: flat again!
Date: Jun 20, 2002
> > Does anyone have an idea why they have different rims on the mains? The > > nosegear is easy to change with the split rims, but the mains are really > > difficult. Also, it is hard to use a tube in the mains with a straight > > valve since there is no clearance. I don't see a reason why the discs > > couldn't be welded to the type rims on the nosegear. It's almost impossible to mount a tube and tire to the Matco split main wheels. I pinched a tube after hours of blood, sweat and tears and finally sent both back to Matco (years ago - previous owner). I got both back and one had a slow leak. That was with natural rubber tubes which are supposed to be better but are thicker, heavier and much more expensive. I finally switched to cheaper synthetic tubes and it was easier but still not easy. They now sell a machined 1" spacer for the split main rims that makes it simple but I'm not sure if it will fit the stock axles. Gary K. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net>
Subject: brakes
Date: Jun 20, 2002
> > As long as they can withstand the pressure, it makes no difference what > the > > lines are made of. The same force will be applied to the brake pads. The > > only difference might be the response time because of the elasticity of > the > > lines, but the difference would be so slight you would never notice it. > > I don't really know about these brakes, but on motorcycles there is a > noticable difference switching from stock rubber lines to braided steel > lines. Better response and more force. > > Gary K. I would imagine so. I envision the plastic/rubber lines would stretch, this some of the applied force goes to expanding the volume of the brake lines, lowering the total pressure in the system. Or is my understanding of physics out of kilter? -Matt ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 20, 2002
> > > > As long as they can withstand the pressure, it makes no difference what > > the > > > lines are made of. The same force will be applied to the brake pads. The > > > only difference might be the response time because of the elasticity of > > the > > > lines, but the difference would be so slight you would never notice it. > > > > I don't really know about these brakes, but on motorcycles there is a > > noticable difference switching from stock rubber lines to braided steel > > lines. Better response and more force. > > > > Gary K. > > I would imagine so. I envision the plastic/rubber lines would stretch, this > some of the applied force goes to expanding the volume of the brake lines, > lowering the total pressure in the system. > > Or is my understanding of physics out of kilter? > I would have to agree with you that the lines stretching will reduce braking, but I only have M.S. in physics, so what do I know. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 20, 2002
From: "Darryl West (Home)" <rdwest(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: brakes
Educational accolades not withstanding, I respectfully disagree. Metal brake lines will not improve the available force of the brakes over plastic ones in this application. The only difference is that it takes a tiny bit of extra travel to stretch the plastic lines. But the force transmitted to the calliper is due to the final pressure, which will be exactly the same (unless the pedal cylinders run out of travel before the plastic lines finish stretching to suit the pressure, which is not even close to happening). You 'might' notice the extra travel, but I doubt it. Regardless, the force is the same. Darryl rdwest(at)shaw.ca http://members.shaw.ca/rdwest/index.htm I would have to agree with you that the lines stretching will reduce braking, but I only have M.S. in physics, so what do I know. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 20, 2002
From: Jerry Jensen <jensenm(at)gtcinternet.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
I agree with Darryl, the final pressure seen by the brake caliper is the same with metal or plastic lines. I am only a mechanical engineer but know for certain that this is true. Jerry Jensen "Darryl West (Home)" wrote: > > Educational accolades not withstanding, I respectfully disagree. Metal brake > lines will not improve the available force of the brakes over plastic ones > in this application. > > I would have to agree with you that the lines stretching will reduce > braking, but I only have M.S. in physics, so what do I know. > ================================================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "castlemaine bus lines" <ccastlem(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 21, 2002
> > > As long as they can withstand the pressure, it makes no difference what > the > > lines are made of. The same force will be applied to the brake pads. The > > only difference might be the response time because of the elasticity of > the > > lines, but the difference would be so slight you would never notice it. > > I don't really know about these brakes, but on motorcycles there is a > noticable difference switching from stock rubber lines to braided steel > lines. Better response and more force. But the braided steel lines are much more difficult to terminate without leaks, which has safety implications. A better choice for motorcycles, and perhaps those looking for a replacement for the lines on thier plane (trying to stay on topic!)... would be the kevlar reinforced rubber lines that many racing and some road bikes use. Geoff and Jodie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "castlemaine bus lines" <ccastlem(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 21, 2002
That comment (whilst true), isn't the be all and end all of braking though. The ability to modulate disk brakes without any delay (which improves controlability) _is_ enhanced when using lines which reduce stretching (whether they be braided metal reinforced rubber, all metal or kevlar reinforced rubber). Not an issue to you? *shrug* YMMV Geoff and Jodie > > I agree with Darryl, the final pressure seen by the brake caliper is the same > with metal or plastic lines. I am only a mechanical engineer but know for > certain that this is true. > > Jerry Jensen > > "Darryl West (Home)" wrote: > > > > > Educational accolades not withstanding, I respectfully disagree. Metal brake > > lines will not improve the available force of the brakes over plastic ones > > in this application. > > > > > I would have to agree with you that the lines stretching will reduce > > braking, but I only have M.S. in physics, so what do I know. > > ================================================================== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2002
From: Keith Maloney <keith.maloney(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
I just can't help my self, I have to inject my 2 cents worth. It seems to me that it takes a force to expand the plastic tube. This force is doing work to expand the tube, that force has to come from the applied force ether initially or constantly. If this is not the case then I think you have developed perpetual energy. But then a case could also be made that there is also force applied to the walls of a metal tube, but no work is done. I could be wrong as this is not my area of expertise, but I think the work done to expand the plastic tube is at the expense of available breaking power. Keith Maloney Jerry Jensen wrote: > > I agree with Darryl, the final pressure seen by the brake caliper is the same > with metal or plastic lines. I am only a mechanical engineer but know for > certain that this is true. > > Jerry Jensen > > "Darryl West (Home)" wrote: > > > > > Educational accolades not withstanding, I respectfully disagree. Metal brake > > lines will not improve the available force of the brakes over plastic ones > > in this application. > > > > > I would have to agree with you that the lines stretching will reduce > > braking, but I only have M.S. in physics, so what do I know. > > ================================================================== > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2002
From: Keith Maloney <keith.maloney(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Ops! I forgot the expanding tube also applies an equal but opposite force on the fluid. On second thought I agree, the pressure at the caliper would be the same for both plastic and metal tube. The only difference would be an increase in displaced volume in the master cylinder. Keith ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Phil & Michele Miller <millerpg(at)ps.gen.nz>
Subject: brakes
Date: Jun 21, 2002
For heaven's sake, guys. Simple physics - "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction". Of course it requires force to expand the tube, HOWEVER, once the flexible line is expanded to its limit there is an EQUAL REACTIVE FORCE which is then applied via the fluid to the piston. Result? No loss of braking force, Just a tad more pedal travel as noted by a previous contributor. Cheers, Phil Miller New Zealand (912ULS CH701) -----Original Message----- From: Keith Maloney [SMTP:keith.maloney(at)attbi.com] Subject: Re: Zenith-List: brakes I just can't help my self, I have to inject my 2 cents worth. It seems to me that it takes a force to expand the plastic tube. This force is doing work to expand the tube, that force has to come from the applied force ether initially or constantly. If this is not the case then I think you have developed perpetual energy. But then a case could also be made that there is also force applied to the walls of a metal tube, but no work is done. I could be wrong as this is not my area of expertise, but I think the work done to expand the plastic tube is at the expense of available breaking power. Keith Maloney Jerry Jensen wrote: > > I agree with Darryl, the final pressure seen by the brake caliper is the same > with metal or plastic lines. I am only a mechanical engineer but know for > certain that this is true. > > Jerry Jensen > > "Darryl West (Home)" wrote: > > > > > Educational accolades not withstanding, I respectfully disagree. Metal brake > > lines will not improve the available force of the brakes over plastic ones > > in this application. > > > > > I would have to agree with you that the lines stretching will reduce > > braking, but I only have M.S. in physics, so what do I know. > > ================================================================== > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 21, 2002
> Braking power is due entirely to the pressure in the brake lines. This > pressure comes from the force you apply to the brake pedals. You are going > to apply the same force to the pedal regardless of what your brake lines are > made of. This will result in the same pressure in the brake lines and the > same force at the brake disks. Naturally the expansion of the plastic lines > will cause the brake pedals to travel farther than with metal lines and this > will require you to do slightly more work and will take a slightly longer > time but this has little to do with the braking force that results. > > Yes, having the plastic brake lines is like having air in the lines. You have to compress the air bubbles before anything happens. One thing I think folks are forgetting about is the brake petal geometry. At least the way my petals are installed I find it more difficult to exert pressure on them the farther they travel. Unlike most pedals where it all tilts and you can just mash all your weight on the pedals, our brake pedals only rotate at the top of the pedal causing you to have to use only the muscles in your feet. So if this wasn't an issue you could get just as much braking with the stretching tubing. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2002
From: Cleone Markwell <cleone(at)rr1.net>
Subject: tire pressure??
It seems to me that with the 40 pounds I'm now using in all tires that I get too much of a bumpy ride. The side of the tire says that the rating of the tire is at 80 pounds. That tire might as well be solid! What are you using friends? Thanks, Cleone ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 21, 2002
> > Why not Cessna does! > > > Hey guys: you can't run metal all the way to the caliper 'cause it moves; > flexing aluminum tubes generally breaks them. > Cessna has spring steel landing gear and the tubing runs along it so there isn't much flex. In our case the tubing would see several inches of travel with how our planes are built. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: x-wnd max?
Date: Jun 21, 2002
What's the largest cross-wind other Zodiac pilots have managed to land in? I just had to put mine down in a gusty 18 kt crosswind. It was a bit of work, but I didn't run out of rudder. Philip A. Polstra Certified Flight Instructor - Airplane Single Engine; Instrument Airplane Ground Instructor - Advanced; Instrument NAFI Instructor http://www.philsflying.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: brakes
From: "Mark Sandidge" <MSandidge(at)peabodyenergy.com>
Date: Jun 21, 2002
06/21/2002 12:19:31 PM I believe this same discussion of aluminum vs plastic brake lines was on this list 2-3 yrs ago and the general concensus was that it did make a difference in braking pressure. You could check the archives. Mark Sandidge "Gary K" To: cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: brakes owner-zenith-list-server@mat ronics.com 06/20/2002 08:46 PM Please respond to zenith-list > As long as they can withstand the pressure, it makes no difference what the > lines are made of. The same force will be applied to the brake pads. The > only difference might be the response time because of the elasticity of the > lines, but the difference would be so slight you would never notice it. I don't really know about these brakes, but on motorcycles there is a noticable difference switching from stock rubber lines to braided steel lines. Better response and more force. Gary K. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pinneo, George" <George.Pinneo(at)trw.com>
Subject: x-wnd max?
Date: Jun 21, 2002
17-19 knots, variable wind direction to 90 degrees, has been manageable with my 912 HDS, but that's not a good time to fly! GGP ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2002
From: Hal Rozema <hartist1(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: brakes
Rule one of hydraulics. Fluids are not compressible. What ever pressure you apply to one end of a system will be exactly replicated at the other end of the system (in PSI for example). Now if you consider the Force applied to the master cylinder multiplied by the area of the master cylinder piston you should have the actual force being applied to the fluid. Then if you divide the force on the fluid by the area of the wheel cylinder you will have the actual force applied to the brake pad. The reverse is true of the amount of movement generated by the system. If MCa = 1 and BCa = 1 then 1 lb F/MC = 1 lb F/BC (travel)T/MC = 1 then T/BC 1 If MCa = 2 and BCa = 1 then 1 lb F/MC = 2 lb F/BC (travel)T/MC = 1 then T/BC 2 Or you will have the same force (BC) with half the pedal force. The system pressure being controlled by the unit cylinder area. The pressure (psi) will always be constant in all directions whether everything is solid or elastic, whether a steel ball (which flexes little) or a latex balloon (which flexes a lot) (or use a controllable pitch prop with a beta [reverse] position) Hal Rozema N701PF finishing wings ________________________________________________________________________________
From: STEFREE(at)aol.com
Date: Jun 21, 2002
Subject: Not A Brakes Comment!! Fiberglass !
Hi List, I need a break from the brakes! I have glassed in my cheeks and airscoops for my Soob Lower Cowl Bowl. Since this is the first time I have ever used bondo (too fill in the low spots after glassing) I think I went a little heavy on the bondo stuff and need to sand, sand, and then sand some more. Is it OK to use a Power Pad Sander if done carefully? Or will this remove to much material too quickly? In general I am pleased with the results. Whereas the glass is messy to work with I now can see many, many posible uses to clean up ugly spots on the 601, like under and around the stabilizer, around the gear boxes, and replace the aluminum wing splice cover. I hope I'm not getting ahead of myself. Thanks for any advice or help. Steve (plugging along, nearing completion!) Freeman ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2002
From: David Terrell <dl_terrell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List Digest: 14 Msgs - 06/20/02
The arguments against a difference between plastic versus steel brake lines are sound with (and only with) the assumption that the "stretch" of the plastic is minimal. If that is true, then yes, there will be only a minimal difference... Additionally, any (in a basic sense) pressure developed at the pedal will be transferred to the caliper instantly. Such is the nature of (basic) hydraulics. However, any stretch of the plastic requires more fluid, which means more pedal travel - travel that could otherwise be used to increase the pressure at the pedal and therefore the pressure at the caliper. Provided, of course, your pedals don't break... Furthermore, the plastic lines don't just stop stretching. They have elastic properties such that they will continue to expand with increased pressure, right up to the point they burst. This is so for most materials. The difference is that steel is so much stronger, that your foot isn't going to produce enough pressure to substantially "stretch" the steel, at least not before the pedals break. Thus, the pressure you are able to develop at the caliper is directly dependant upon the pressure you develop at the pedals, which is directly dependant upon the strength of the entire system. If you use stronger lines, then the weak point may become the pedals. Finally, just maybe, we have uncovered why the recommended brake lines are plastic. If the lines don't allow more force than other components of the system can handle, then those other components, hopefully won't fail. Since the plastic lines can "stretch" and "recover" a lot better than the pedals, the whole system better protects itself and lasts longer. So, the real question may be (it is for me), "do the plastic lines provide sufficient braking power?" If so, great - "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". If you feel you need more, then switch to steel lines. Of course, then you'll either have to be gentle so as not to produce more force than the rest of the system can handle or you can expect other failures, like broke pedals. Personally, I'd rather have sluggish brakes that (together with proper throttle control) work well enough for the life of my toy, than have a pedal break when the other plane on the runway has started his takeoff roll... This is all part of the joy of experimental aviation. Just keep in mind that EVERY change from a proven design can (and most likely will) have more than the obvious consequences. But, then thats just my $2 (2c doesn't seem like enough to cover that rambling...). Dave 701 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: brakes
Date: Jun 21, 2002
From: "Ihab Awad" <iawad(at)scimagix.com>
Hi everyone, Absent the theoretical ideas, I wonder how the behavior of the human "in the loop" changes in response to the feedback they get. Based on ** my personal subjective experience with myself **, I wonder if perhaps our bodies don't necessarily react to force alone. I think that, if I have to push the pedal 3" rather than 1", my brain will tell me that "I've done enough already" and, subconsciously, I will apply less force at the end of the stroke. Maybe it's related to mechanical advantage at the end of the stroke (as a previous poster pointed out). Maybe my muscles get "tired" doing the work of pushing the pedal the full 3", and thus end up exerting less force. Maybe I'm just lazy. ;) I dunno. I guess I am advocating that we assign more credibility to subjective "feel". I suspect that a complete theoretical explanation would have to be very complex, since it would have to account for the psychology and physiology of the operator. Peace, Ihab ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Alberti" <daberti(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
Date: Jun 21, 2002
For information on how hydraulic pressure works check the following link http://www.enerpac.com/Pdf/BasicHydraulics.pdf ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Maloney" <keith.maloney(at)attbi.com> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: brakes > > I just can't help my self, I have to inject my 2 cents worth. It seems to me that > it takes a force to expand the plastic tube. This force is doing work to expand > the tube, that force has to come from the applied force ether initially or > constantly. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Not A Brakes Comment!! Fiberglass !
Date: Jun 21, 2002
> I need a break from the brakes! I have glassed in my cheeks and airscoops > for my Soob Lower Cowl Bowl. Since this is the first time I have ever used > bondo (too fill in the low spots after glassing) I think I went a little > heavy on the bondo stuff and need to sand, sand, and then sand some more. Is > it OK to use a Power Pad Sander if done carefully? Or will this remove to > much material too quickly? > I used a power sander on mine with no issues. I have several layers of fiberglass that I used to glass in the cheeks. Remember that this isn't a structural part. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "patrick walsh" <pwalsh4539(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: crosswind component
Date: Jun 21, 2002
I have landed with a 15 knot crosswind just fine with the plastic brake lines. Changed to aluminum and got 20+... Sorry, I just couldnt resist. Seriously, the plastic lines are just fine for our little 600 pound airplane IMHO.... The geometry of thy cylinders at the petal could use some fine-tuning though. Still, mine hold at runup of 3800 (Rotax 912)...and will hold at 4500 on grass....but it does take a lot of push.... explorer.msn.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "barry mayne" <bazmay(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: x-wnd max?
Date: Jun 22, 2002
By absolute necessity I had to put my HDS down on a grass strip with a cross wind at 90 degrees of around 35 knots. I didn't straighten up until a second or two before touchdown and let it "plop" the last 6" onto the grass. I still had plenty of rudder control. According to calculations I had a 40 knot head wind when flying to the strip which was on the coast and totally unprotected from the wind. Definitely not something I would want to do every day. Barry Mayne HDS Jabiru 3300 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com> Subject: Zenith-List: x-wnd max? > > What's the largest cross-wind other Zodiac pilots have managed to land in? > I just had to put mine down in a gusty 18 kt crosswind. It was a bit of > work, but I didn't run out of rudder. > > Philip A. Polstra > Certified Flight Instructor - Airplane Single Engine; Instrument Airplane > Ground Instructor - Advanced; Instrument > NAFI Instructor > http://www.philsflying.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd(at)thegateway.net>
Subject: 701 CG
Date: Jun 21, 2002
Has anybody flown the 701 throughout the CG envelop? Any comments? Chuck D. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 21, 2002
From: Bill Morelli <billvt(at)together.net>
Subject: Re: x-wnd max?
The strip I fly out of has a 90 deg cross wind more than half the time. I have landed with crosswind gusting as high as 30 knots with no problem. In my opinion, my HDS is much easier to land in crosswind than the C-150's, C172's that I flew for my first 250 hours of flying. Regards, Bill (N812BM - HDS - Tri - Stratus - Vermont - 143.4 flight hrs. - 223 landings) web site -> http://homepages.together.net/~billvt/ >What's the largest cross-wind other Zodiac pilots have managed to land in? >I just had to put mine down in a gusty 18 kt crosswind. It was a bit of >work, but I didn't run out of rudder. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick" <RWRIPPER(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Brake intensifiers
Date: Jun 22, 2002
Cleone, Having the MC5 on my HD with a C-85, I think most of us on the list would be very interested to hear the your results after your having the intensifiers installed. good luck, Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: Cleone Markwell <cleone(at)rr1.net> Subject: Zenith-List: Brake intensifiers > > Hi CH 601HD Listers who want more braking power; > I have just talked with the people at Matco who make these brakes and If > you have the brakes with the resevoir on the cylinder it is a MC5 and they > must install the intensifiers free for you and test them for about $10 each > plus postage. You may talk with them at: 801 486 7574. I am going to try > this route. Thanks for all the interest. It sounds like this is a > universal problem. Cleone Markwell > 128 hrs of fun flying the HD with the 912 UL. > > ============ Contributions of other form > ============ messages. members. > ============ http://www.matronics.com/subscription http://www.matronics.com/browselist/zenith-list http://www.matronics.com/zenith-list http://www.matronics.com/contribution > ============ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 22, 2002
From: Bob <rbelshe(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: brakes
I have 450 hrs in my Lancair 235 with Nylaflow brake lines. This is the standard setup on most Lancairs. I don't believe the stretching of the plastic is detectable. If your brakes are not good and firm, it is probably due to a small bubble of air trapped in the system somewhere. Bubbles can be difficult. The solution for me was to fill by pumping brake fluid up from the caliper to the master cylinders, using a pump-type oil can. The outer 4 feet of my lines are teflon with steel braid, for mechanical strength. The fittings were easy to install and I have not had any problems with leaks. Bob Belshe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "vdp" <vdp(at)freemail.absa.co.za>
Subject: Re: Longer wings CH701
Date: Jun 22, 2002
Started fabricating components for plans build 701. I am researching all weight saving options and others, like longer wings, to be able to use a heavier engine. Claude wrote on the list in September 1999: 7. THE modification I should have made. Build a 9.80m span wing instead of 8.22m. Due to old UL regs now obsolete here, most 701s built in France had to have this span. They fly MUCH better, I know a 701 with a Hirth F30 which is a HELL of STOL and lands (in clean) within a handkerchief. I did not find any more on this in the archives. Could anyone please assist with information on this mod. Vic du Preez Pretoria, South Africa ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 22, 2002
From: Leo Gates <leogates(at)ev1.net>
Subject: Re: tire pressure??
The Zenith manual calls for tires to be filled so that from the ground to the rim the height is 2/3rds the unloaded height. My guess is about 15 - 18 lbs. Those flying can give a better answer. I can tell you that on my BC12-D Taylorcraft (about the same weight) I use 14 lbs. Leo Gates Cleone Markwell wrote: > >It seems to me that with the 40 pounds I'm now using in all tires that I >get too much of a bumpy ride. The side of the tire says that the rating of >the tire is at 80 pounds. That tire might as well be solid! What are you >using friends? Thanks, Cleone > >. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: tire pressure??
Date: Jun 22, 2002
Have any of you running the Zac tyres or trailer tyres at 16/18 lb/sq.in had a problem with sidewalls cracking? I know that is how Chris designed the u/c but I've had two sets of mains tyres crack. I now run at 30 lbs. Dave Austin 601HDS - 912 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "michael brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au>
Subject: Re: Longer wings CH701
Date: Jun 23, 2002
There are a couple of STOL up in northern Australia that are built with an extra half a metre on each wing tip. It's supposed to increase the stol performance dramatically. I have a bit of a difficulty with it from an engineering point of view. A wing is basically a truss. The longer you make it the higher the loads are going to be at the wing root. Unless you strengthen the wing root members you shouldn't be lengthening the wings. That might or might not be correct but I'm OK with that. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: vdp <vdp(at)freemail.absa.co.za> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Longer wings CH701 > > Started fabricating components for plans build 701. I am researching > all weight saving options > and others, like longer wings, to be able to use a heavier engine. > > Claude wrote on the list in September 1999: > 7. THE modification I should have made. Build a 9.80m span wing instead > of 8.22m. > Due to old UL regs now obsolete here, most 701s built in France had to > have this span. > They fly MUCH better, I know a 701 with a Hirth F30 which is a HELL of > STOL and lands > (in clean) within a handkerchief. > > I did not find any more on this in the archives. > Could anyone please assist with information on this mod. > > Vic du Preez > Pretoria, South Africa > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 22, 2002
From: Mike Fothergill <mfothergill(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: tire pressure??
I am using 30-35 lbs pressure. Mike C-FRND UHS Spinners Dave Austin wrote: > > > Have any of you running the Zac tyres or trailer tyres at 16/18 lb/sq.in had > a problem with sidewalls cracking? I know that is how Chris designed the > u/c but I've had two sets of mains tyres crack. I now run at 30 lbs. > Dave Austin 601HDS - 912 > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 22, 2002
From: Scott and Valeree Stout <the_stouts(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 801: Return Line Fuel tank fitting
Hello again... Three of my four fuel tanks from ZAC do not have the return fuel fitting. Am I missing something? It was my understanding all fuel tanks were to have this fitting. Has anyone else had this issue? I will of course contact ZAC on Monday. Thanx... -Scott ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 22, 2002
Subject: XL Landing gear
From: wizard-24(at)juno.com
I'm having one of those frustrating days that makes me want to toss the whole damn plane in the nearest dumpster.... But before I do that, has any other XL builder gotten to the point where you've shaped the main gear where the wheels mount to make room for the brake calipers? This spring gear is VERY thick aluminum, and I have yet to find an easy way to cut and shape it. (I've tried a Sawz-all, a hacksaw, various hand files, and cursing at it. Nothing's worked very well so far, except that the latter made me feel a bit better). Help! Mike Fortunato 601XL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2002
From: "J. Davis" <jd(at)lri.sjhc.london.on.ca>
Subject: [studid?] 701 tricks
Greetings... I'm wondering if there are any 701 pilots out there who have experimented with various ways to bump the cruise speed up for the occasional cross-country, such as Oshkosh. The Pegastol retracting leading edge slats reportedly add 20 mph or so. Anyone thought about ground adjustable slats, for instance, which could be relocated in the 'retracted' position? What about gap seals to temporarily 'remove' the slots formed by the leading wing edge and the slats? What about removing the slats entirely? Other methods? I myself have added strut fairings and am very pleased with the results, and am currently working on strut-to-fuselage and strut-to-wing attach fairings, as well as cabin adjustable flaperon reflex angle. Now before anyone jumps on my case with the 'what do you think you are, a designer/test pilot?' argument, let me say that I realize that some of these hypothetical solutions are fairly dramatic and would change the characteristics of the airplane as designed. That's why I asking for other's direct experience, as well as theoretical discussion. I know there is at least one guy who has tried the slat removal experiment. Comments? Hmmm, I feel some stirring from the Ottawa/Hull area.... ;') -- Regards, J. flying: Zenair STOL CH701/582 C-IGGY , 180+ hrs. building: Sonex #325, engine undecided, probably Jabiru 3300/6/120hp | J. Davis, M.Sc. (comp_sci) | email: jd(at)uwo.ca | | SysMgr, research programmer | voice: (519) 646 6100 x64166 | | Lawson Research Institute | fax: (519) 646 6135 | | London, Ontario | lriweb.sjhc.london.on.ca/~jd | He who laughs last, thinks slowest. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2002
From: "Darryl West (Home)" <rdwest(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Which prop?
Hi Perry: I replaced my GSC in 1996 after about 1 year of use, due to reports of blade shedding and my own observations of LE erosion. It now graces my living room - I can get away with this because I'm single ;-) I installed a 3-blade Warp Drive ground adjustable non-tapered (see photos on link below). I have 601HD/trike/912UL. It has been excellent, and they are a good company. BTW: Why did you use the "do not arc__ve"? This seems pretty on-topic to me. Darryl rdwest(at)shaw.ca http://members.shaw.ca/rdwest/index.htm I've decided to bite the bullet and get another prop for my 601HD. I have a GSC 3 blade ground adjustable and I just think there have been too many alerts and incidents on them to bother with it. So, what are people using on their 601's (912 engine) and what opinions are out there? I'm looking for an easy ground ajustable. Thanks Perry Morrison ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne McMullen" <cmcmullen(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: XL Landing gear
Date: Jun 23, 2002
Hi Mike, My family is building four XL's and we have a better than average workshop. After a long consideration, no aluminum cut or bent, we decided to have a shop cut and bent the main gear. The other choice is to buy the main gear. Yes, we are building the planes from the plans. Wayne ----- Original Message ----- From: <wizard-24(at)juno.com> Subject: Zenith-List: XL Landing gear > > > I'm having one of those frustrating days that makes me want to toss the > whole damn plane in the nearest dumpster.... > > But before I do that, has any other XL builder gotten to the point where > you've shaped the main gear where the wheels mount to make room for the > brake calipers? This spring gear is VERY thick aluminum, and I have yet > to find an easy way to cut and shape it. (I've tried a Sawz-all, a > hacksaw, various hand files, and cursing at it. Nothing's worked very > well so far, except that the latter made me feel a bit better). Help! > > Mike Fortunato > 601XL > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2002
From: oswaldo10(at)globo.com
Subject: Any brazilian 601 builders on the list?
Hi all If there are any,I would like to contact brasilian 601 builders on this list. I am looking forward to start a 601XL project (kit). Regards Oswaldo Rio de Janeiro - RJ A busca mais veloz e precisa da internet. Acesse agora: http://www.zoom.com.br. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jon Croke" <Jon(at)joncroke.com>
Subject: Re: [studid?] 701 tricks
Date: Jun 23, 2002
Can we infer that we will be honored with your presence this year at Osh with your plane?? (you still have one of the BEST web sites for the 701 builer, IMHO) Jon near Green Bay 701 half-way www.joncroke.com > > Greetings... I'm wondering if there are any 701 pilots out there who > have experimented with various ways to bump the cruise speed up for > the occasional cross-country, such as Oshkosh ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Townsend" <601xl(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: XL Landing gear
Date: Jun 22, 2002
Mike you may find this crude but I just did mine and found that an angle Grinder, Belt sander and router was the only way to go without the need for Grecian Formula in-between spells. Mark Townsend 601XL EA82 MPFI Turbo -----Original Message----- >I'm having one of those frustrating days that makes me want to toss the >whole damn plane in the nearest dumpster.... > >But before I do that, has any other XL builder gotten to the point where >you've shaped the main gear where the wheels mount to make room for the >brake calipers? This spring gear is VERY thick aluminum, and I have yet >to find an easy way to cut and shape it. (I've tried a Sawz-all, a >hacksaw, various hand files, and cursing at it. Nothing's worked very >well so far, except that the latter made me feel a bit better). Help! > >Mike Fortunato >601XL ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Townsend" <601xl(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Eggenfellner Grounding Order
Date: Jun 22, 2002
Here is the Grounding order from Eggenfellner I know some of you are using or installing one of these engines and thought it would be prudent to post on this list ! Also for those installing there own Subaru VERSIONS please note why this Grounding was ordered and design your fuel system appropriately ! Mark Townsend 601XL EA-82 MPFI Turbo ----- Subject: Mandatory Subaru / Glastar Fuel Update Dear All Customers, Recent discoveries regarding the fuel temperature using the "Fuel Cooler" or "Header Tank" type of fuel cooling has been determined to be insufficient in some airplanes and flight situations. It is now important that no one will fly an airplane equipped with a Subaru engine without a fuel return system back to the main tanks. The details of this system are being worked out right now but generally will consist of a feed and return line to each tank and a feed and return line forward to the engine all connecting through an Andair 6-port fuel selector valve. Charlie Walker and Bob Warfel are now converting to this system and have promised to keep us posted on the actual detail of the installation. For now the important part is to stay on the ground until this has been resolved. If the fuel temperature gets too high with the recirculation through the fuel cooler or a header tank, the fuel pressure can suddenly drop to dangerously low levels and the engine surge and possibly quit. I realize that for some this will be a major undertaking but it is necessary. The fuel cooler was initially thought to be a way around the need to return fuel back to the tanks. However now we have found that there is no substitute for the return system which returns fuel with possible vapor in it and draws fresh, vapor free fuel to the engine. Jan www.subaruaircraft.com <http://www.subaruaircraft.com/> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Brigman" <jbrigman(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: hacksaws don't work well
Date: Jun 23, 2002
Mike; > I'm having one of those frustrating days that makes me want to toss the > whole damn plane in the nearest dumpster.... > > But before I do that, has any other XL builder gotten to the point where > you've shaped the main gear where the wheels mount to make room for the > brake calipers? This spring gear is VERY thick aluminum, and I have yet > to find an easy way to cut and shape it. (I've tried a Sawz-all, a > hacksaw, various hand files, and cursing at it. Nothing's worked very > well so far, except that the latter made me feel a bit better). Help! Mike; Sorry about the saws-all and hacksaws. Saws-alls are just about impossible to control along a straight line or on a small piece. They work best for cutting doorways in walls and are better suited as a construction tool. With a hacksaw you get extremely poor results on beefy pieces of aluminum. It's impossible to get the blade tight enough to track straight, not to mention holding the saw straight. I'm doing an HDS, so I don't have the spring steel gear (although I wish I did). I don't know how much metal you've got to take off, and in what shape it has to come off, but you might try using a bench sander ($100-$129 at local big hardware store). My favorite is the Delta disc/belt sander. (do NOT buy the sears bench sander) I use the 4" wide belt/8" disc model. The standard sanding pads that come on the unit are fine, but buy extras if you do get one, in both the same grit (80 grit) and finer (120 on up). First time I ever used one, I couldn't believe the quality of the results. I was doubtful I could do such good work, but I tried it and thought I'd died and gone to heaven. I just looked at the part for minutes afterward, I was so happy with how it turned out. I'd been suffering through hacksaw hell just like you. When sanding the aluminum, keep the sanding action short in duration, keeping the aluminum cool. (It's been mentioned here before that you can weaken 6061 if it goes over 180F for more than a dozen minutes.) Go slowly. The sander will eat away vast quantities if you let it, but you don't want to overheat the aluminum. If it ever gets too hot to comfortably touch, I take a small break and dip it in a pan of water kept nearby. Wipe the water off with a cloth and proceed. I also use a $99 tabletop bandsaw to rough-cut the aluminum when there is too much to sand off. It works OK, and the single-speed unit is just fine with a metal-cutting blade installed. The cheap bandsaws are hard to adjust, but they work fine once everything is in place. Please note: on a cheap unit it can be hard to get the blade to track exactly straight, so I usually do rough-cuts and straighten them up after with the sander. If you have a LOT of material to take off, and you need to take it off straight, a tabletop circular saw with a aluminum blade works miracles. I cut the extrusions for my scratch-made center wing spar on one and it worked great. You've got to be VERY careful and not stop the part as it goes through the saw, and you want to avoid any possible left-right motion, as that will cut a gap in the metal with the blade teeth. The best blades come from a company called "Freud". They laser-cut their blades and once you've used one, you won't be happy with any others. I can get a near-mirror-finish on my cuts with the Freud 80-tooth aluminum cutting blade. I was able to pay for the saw in what I saved by using standard-sized extrusions instead of the custom sized extrusions. Sure, people might say you don't need these tools. Maybe you could put this plane together with just sticks and rocks, but I've found that the "frustration sessions" you mention greatly diminish with good shop tools. The skilled woodworkers are right: you can only do a good job with good power tools. I'll PASS on the sticks and rocks, thank you. With any of these tools, you'll make a lot of aluminum fragments and dust. Plan some way to handle the dust (blowers, fans or shop-vac) and keep ventilation very good. Use the disposable dust masks and eye protection. Good luck; JKB ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: Which prop?
Date: Jun 23, 2002
Perry, Mike Fothergill and I invested in the Arplast flight adjustables a couple of years ago. It would be a significant improvement on your current prop. Our problem was that both of us had changed the wings from HD to HDS, rad and oil cooler inside the cowl, fairings on gear leg boxes, modified (narrowed) wheel covers etc and we found that around 115 mph IAS the IVO props ran out of gas. Because the centre of the IVO cannot change pitch, it became a large dinner plate on the front. Bit of a drag. Otherwise the IVO does give, at a reasonable price, the advantages of air-adjustable. The IVO was a significant improvement over the GSC ground adjustable, for climb and cruise, for obvious reasons. Now, the real meat. The IVO cost $1400.00 Canadian. The Arplast, $4300.00. In jest I've commented that the Arplast let me spent $1000.00 for each mph increase in cruise speed! Mike has now changed to a Rotax 912S, and really gets more benefit from the Arplast. He can now cruise his 601HDS at 130mph IAS on around four galls/hour. You pays your money.... Dave Austin 601HDS - 912 - 500 hrs ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve M" <ondeck355(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: 701 tricks - what website?
Date: Jun 23, 2002
What's the URL for that website? I'd love to have a look. Thanks, Steve Maher Minimax 1100R When Sport Pilot is in effect, CH-701! >From: "Jon Croke" <Jon(at)joncroke.com> >Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: [studid?] 701 tricks >Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 10:04:49 -0500 > > >Can we infer that we will be honored with your presence this year at Osh >with your plane?? >(you still have one of the BEST web sites for the 701 builer, IMHO) > >Jon >near Green Bay >701 half-way > >www.joncroke.com > > > > > Greetings... I'm wondering if there are any 701 pilots out there who > > have experimented with various ways to bump the cruise speed up for > > the occasional cross-country, such as Oshkosh > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jon Croke" <Jon(at)joncroke.com>
Subject: Re: 701 tricks - what website?
Date: Jun 23, 2002
\> What's the URL for that website? I'd love to have a look. > > Thanks, > Steve Maher > Minimax 1100R > When Sport Pilot is in effect, CH-701! I'm not paid for this endorsement (!), but here it is: http://lriweb.sjhc.london.on.ca/~jd/ch701/construction_gallery/ BTW, if you start your 701 NOW, it'll be done about the time Sport Pilot becomes law! (IMHO) (; Jon > > >Can we infer that we will be honored with your presence this year at Osh > >with your plane?? > >(you still have one of the BEST web sites for the 701 builder, IMHO) > > > >Jon > >near Green Bay > >701 half-way > > > > www.joncroke.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2002
From: "J. Davis" <jd(at)lri.sjhc.london.on.ca>
Subject: Re: 701 tricks - what website?
Ok, you guys are making me feel bad now for not having kept my site better updated, its a bit 'stale'. (see my signature below for the link) I have a bunch of recent pics I haven't gotten around to hooking to the page yet, I guess that nap I was planning will have to wait ;') Thanks for the good feedback, although, really, there are some much better sites out there. Mine is pretty bare-bones, but its damn nice to hear that maybe it is some use to someone, somewhere. Thanks. Look for a 'Recent Updates' link in the next few hours... Oh, yes, I'll be at Osh, but not flying in this year since I need to haul some Sonex stuff back home with me. I *will* be flying in to Sherbrooke, Quebec next weekend for the annual "Faucheurs des Marguerites" fly-in, and for me, its about as far as Osh; about 12 hours flying time. If you want to see a 'giggle' of 701s (kind of like a gaggle of geese, but face it: you need to keep your sense of humor if your into CH701s!), that's one of the best places in N. America to see them. Highly recommended if you are geographically close enough: <http://www.lesfaucheurs.com/~rpaquette/> On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Steve M wrote: > > What's the URL for that website? I'd love to have a look. > > Thanks, > Steve Maher > Minimax 1100R > When Sport Pilot is in effect, CH-701! > > > >From: "Jon Croke" <Jon(at)joncroke.com> > >Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com > >To: > >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: [studid?] 701 tricks > >Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 10:04:49 -0500 > > > > > >Can we infer that we will be honored with your presence this year at Osh > >with your plane?? > >(you still have one of the BEST web sites for the 701 builer, IMHO) > > > >Jon > >near Green Bay > >701 half-way > > > >www.joncroke.com > > > > > > > > Greetings... I'm wondering if there are any 701 pilots out there who > > > have experimented with various ways to bump the cruise speed up for > > > the occasional cross-country, such as Oshkosh > > > > > > -- Regards, J. flying: Zenair STOL CH701/582 C-IGGY , 180+ hrs. building: Sonex #325, engine undecided, probably Jabiru 3300/6/120hp | J. Davis, M.Sc. (comp_sci) | email: jd(at)uwo.ca | | SysMgr, research programmer | voice: (519) 646 6100 x64166 | | Lawson Research Institute | fax: (519) 646 6135 | | London, Ontario | lriweb.sjhc.london.on.ca/~jd | We cannot change the direction of the wind... but we can adjust our sails. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2002
From: "Darryl West (Home)" <rdwest(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Which prop?
I had a few guys ask off-list, so I thought I would share with all: My Warp drive is 3-blade, 68" diameter, pitched 12 degrees at tips. I got them to add the optional nickel inlay leading edges, as I used to operate out of a gravel strip. I get about 4200 rpm static to about 4800 rpm on take-off, giving about 900-1000 fpm solo at 5000 feet, and 108 mph max speed at full throttle 5400 rpm, level. I feel the pitch is as high as I want it. Better climb could be had at lower pitch, but I'm happy as-is. I chose non-tapered because he said he could taper them later for a nominal fee if I didn't like the straight ones, and I felt more blade area was probably better for climb and worse for cruise, but the 601HD isn't a fast machine anyway. Also I like the looks better! The straight type blades (mine) are actually tapered a bit along the whole length, but the tapered type blades (not mine) start a higher taper rate about halfway down. Again, I have high regard for Warp Drive. Here is a picture: http://members.shaw.ca/rdwest/Pictures/Airplanes/c-fvtz1.jpg Darryl rdwest(at)shaw.ca http://members.shaw.ca/rdwest/index.htm Hi Perry: I replaced my GSC in 1996 after about 1 year of use, due to reports of blade shedding and my own observations of LE erosion. It now graces my living room - I can get away with this because I'm single ;-) I installed a 3-blade Warp Drive ground adjustable non-tapered (see photos on link below). I have 601HD/trike/912UL. It has been excellent, and they are a good company. BTW: Why did you use the "do not arc__ve"? This seems pretty on-topic to me. Darryl rdwest(at)shaw.ca http://members.shaw.ca/rdwest/index.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 23, 2002
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Eggenfellner Grounding Order
> > It is now important that no one will fly an airplane equipped with > a Subaru engine without a fuel return system back to the main > tanks. I assume this means all Subaru engines with fuel injection and not Subaru engines with carburetors. -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. Wings, tail, fuselage and canopy done, wheels and tail mounted. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "doug" <dm10495(at)cedarnet.org>
Subject: 601 spring gear
Date: Jun 23, 2002
Hi Mike I used a hacksaw and then files. It really didn't take to long. Doug Mattson dm10495(at)cedarnet.org ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Lumkes, John Jr." <lumkes(at)msoe.edu>
Subject: 701 Questions
Date: Jun 24, 2002
Hello everyone, After being a lurker for quite a while, I am in the process of ordering a 701 kit and attending the rudder workshop in August, picking up the kit while there. I have several questions: Most urgently: I have decided on the strobe kit, but am undecided on the electric trim or folding wings. Does anyone have any comments on the value/usefulness of these options? Is it easy to trim out with the manual trim. If the wings folded easily with one person I would consider it since it makes building a garage in my back yard (800' strip) easier. Since this is down the road and the folding option is a retrofit, I am more interested in the trim question. Down the road: Engine choices??? I have looked at the Rotaxes (obviously), Hirth 2706 or F30, Jabiru (high rpm), and a Geo 3cyl-turbo or Geo 4cyl with a Raven redrive. It would be fun to have a discussion/user experience about these or any other engines people are using. Thanks for your time! p.s. Are there any 701's near Milwaukee that are being built or flying? ----------------------------------------- John Lumkes Jr., Ph.D., PE Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering Milwaukee School of Engineering 1025 N. Broadway, Milwaukee, WI 53202 lumkes(at)msoe.edu http://www.msoe.edu/~lumkes ----------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 24, 2002
Subject: Re: XL Landing gear
From: Michael R Fortunato <wizard-24(at)juno.com>
Just a quick note of thanks to all who answered my question with some good advice and support. Being that the landing gear spring is already mounted on the plane, and there was nothing in the plans about having to trim it to fit the brake calipers (in fact, nothing in the plans about the wheels and brakes at all), I am faced with the task of having to do this while the part is on the plane. So, think I'll try the angle grinder method first. But a heads up to future XL-builders -- better to cut and fit these parts before mounting the gear spring! Mike Fortunato 601XL ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "michael brook" <walruss(at)optushome.com.au>
Subject: Re: 701 Questions
Date: Jun 25, 2002
The electric trim is fantastic. Definitely worth it and it makes a difference to the way the machine performs. A couple of touches on the trim can mean the difference of 3-4kts cruise. All you are doing is flicking a switch and watching a led. It beats the hell out of a manual trim. The folding wing option is universally piloried by all those that have it. I know of 3 guys who got the folding wing option and didn't install it because they thought that it wasn't worth it. I'm going fllying in my beautiful machine mike2planes ----- Original Message ----- From: Lumkes, John Jr. <lumkes(at)msoe.edu> Subject: Zenith-List: 701 Questions > > Hello everyone, > > After being a lurker for quite a while, I am in the process of ordering a > 701 kit and attending the rudder workshop in August, picking up the kit > while there. I have several questions: > > Most urgently: I have decided on the strobe kit, but am undecided on the > electric trim or folding wings. Does anyone have any comments on the > value/usefulness of these options? Is it easy to trim out with the manual > trim. If the wings folded easily with one person I would consider it since > it makes building a garage in my back yard (800' strip) easier. Since this > is down the road and the folding option is a retrofit, I am more interested > in the trim question. > > Down the road: Engine choices??? I have looked at the Rotaxes (obviously), > Hirth 2706 or F30, Jabiru (high rpm), and a Geo 3cyl-turbo or Geo 4cyl with > a Raven redrive. It would be fun to have a discussion/user experience about > these or any other engines people are using. > > Thanks for your time! > > p.s. Are there any 701's near Milwaukee that are being built or flying? > > ----------------------------------------- > John Lumkes Jr., Ph.D., PE > Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering > Milwaukee School of Engineering > 1025 N. Broadway, Milwaukee, WI 53202 > lumkes(at)msoe.edu > http://www.msoe.edu/~lumkes > ----------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Phil Owens" <owensp(at)charter.net>
Subject: Shaping Aluminum Landing Gear
Date: Jun 24, 2002
Dear List, I read a post form one of our listers he was having some serious problems shaping his landing gear to fit the calipers. Perhaps this info may help. When shaping the landing gear for the CH-801 which is thick aluminum I first made steel patterns of the exact dimensions drilled the holes using the pattern for accuarcy then traced the outside onto the aluminum with a felt tip pen. I rough cut outside the marks using a ROTO-ZIP with a metal cutting disc leaving about 1/8" to trim to fit. Then I turned to an air driven Die-Grinder with a bit that cut square and was about 1/2" long, to prevent the die bit from loading up I would first run beeswax on the bit before cutting, I was able to shape the part for a nice clean precise fit in this manner. I won't tell you it is fast or easy but it worked to perfection and drilling the holes to the pattern was crucial for an accurate fit. I still have the steel patterns I used if anyone would like to purchase them.. see photo ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Tellet" <telletdl(at)erols.com>
Subject: Canopy and shoulder width
Date: Jun 24, 2002
List, I don't want to open up the forward vs side opening thread again - I think the archives shows most of the pros and cons with both systems. However, I haven't seen any mention of the impact of the canopy on cabin room. In particular, do the hooks on the side opening option cut down on the width at the shoulders? From the plans it looks like the rear hooks would be right at the upper arm level. Any comments? David Tellet, 601 HD tail and wings done ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Canopy and shoulder width
Date: Jun 24, 2002
> room. In particular, do the hooks on the side opening option cut down on > the width at the shoulders? From the plans it looks like the rear hooks > would be right at the upper arm level. Any comments? > Nope. Mine are totally out of my way. I just have to make sure the shoulder harnesses don't get caught in them. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 24, 2002
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: OAT - where to put?
With my Grand-Rapid's EIS, I got an OAT (outside air temp) probe... where and how do I install it? Thanks! Michel ===== ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61(at)birch.net>
Subject: Re: OAT - where to put?
Date: Jun 24, 2002
> I got an OAT (outside air > temp) probe... where and how do I install it? ++ I hid my probe inside one of the NACA vents. Gets good contact with the outside air and doesn't show. Fred Area 41 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2002
Subject: Re: OAT - where to put?
From: Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net>
on 6/24/02 11:05 PM, Fred or Sandy Hulen at hulens61(at)birch.net wrote: > >> I got an OAT (outside air >> temp) probe... where and how do I install it? I'm not sure what this unit looks like, but I installed an OAT (one of those electronic indoor/outdoor units from Can. Tire) sensor on the bottom skin just under the cockpit so that it's in the shade. -- Grant Corriveau Montreal Zodiac 601hds/CAM100 C-GHTF www.theWingStayedON.ca ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Phil & Michele Miller <millerpg(at)ps.gen.nz>
Subject: 701 Questions
Date: Jun 25, 2002
OK, thanks for your help. Phil Miller -----Original Message----- From: michael brook [SMTP:walruss(at)optushome.com.au] Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 Questions The electric trim is fantastic. Definitely worth it and it makes a difference to the way the machine performs. A couple of touches on the trim can mean the difference of 3-4kts cruise. All you are doing is flicking a switch and watching a led. It beats the hell out of a manual trim. The folding wing option is universally piloried by all those that have it. I know of 3 guys who got the folding wing option and didn't install it because they thought that it wasn't worth it. I'm going fllying in my beautiful machine mike2planes ----- Original Message ----- From: Lumkes, John Jr. <lumkes(at)msoe.edu> Subject: Zenith-List: 701 Questions > > Hello everyone, > > After being a lurker for quite a while, I am in the process of ordering a > 701 kit and attending the rudder workshop in August, picking up the kit > while there. I have several questions: > > Most urgently: I have decided on the strobe kit, but am undecided on the > electric trim or folding wings. Does anyone have any comments on the > value/usefulness of these options? Is it easy to trim out with the manual > trim. If the wings folded easily with one person I would consider it since > it makes building a garage in my back yard (800' strip) easier. Since this > is down the road and the folding option is a retrofit, I am more interested > in the trim question. > > Down the road: Engine choices??? I have looked at the Rotaxes (obviously), > Hirth 2706 or F30, Jabiru (high rpm), and a Geo 3cyl-turbo or Geo 4cyl with > a Raven redrive. It would be fun to have a discussion/user experience about > these or any other engines people are using. > > Thanks for your time! > > p.s. Are there any 701's near Milwaukee that are being built or flying? > > ----------------------------------------- > John Lumkes Jr., Ph.D., PE > Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering > Milwaukee School of Engineering > 1025 N. Broadway, Milwaukee, WI 53202 > lumkes(at)msoe.edu > http://www.msoe.edu/~lumkes > ----------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 25, 2002
From: David Terrell <dl_terrell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 701 Questions
As far as I know, there is no manual trim option on the 701, other than building in a fixed (ground adjustable) trim tab like the small cessnas and pipers have on the rudder. It's quite possible that some of the more industrious builders out there have created their own manual trim system. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dr. Perry Morrison" <prm(at)softhome.net>
Subject: Re: Which prop?
Date: Jun 25, 2002
Danny Defelici mentioned off list that he's become a distributor for the Czech sport prop. I've heard about these for years. Any experiences out there? Perry Morrison ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dr. Perry Morrison" <prm(at)softhome.net>
Subject: Which Prop?
Date: Jun 26, 2002
Any experiences with the Czech Sport Prop? Perry Morrison ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve M" <ondeck355(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: 701: What's wrong with the wing-folding option?
Date: Jun 25, 2002
I don't have a 701, and am asking the question for educational purposes. If that many don't like the wing-folding option, there must be a good reason. I have a Minimax 1100R, single-seater, Rotax 377, almost an ultralight. The wings are removable, but it's a pain, especially when done alone and in a gusty wind, when it's nearly impossible. Sometimes I'd give my eyeteeth to have any sort of wing-folding option. How do the 701's wings fold? And what gets in the way of the system being desirable? Steve Maher >From: Phil & Michele Miller <millerpg(at)ps.gen.nz> >Reply-To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com >To: "'zenith-list(at)matronics.com'" >Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 701 Questions >Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:04:14 +1200 > > > >OK, thanks for your help. > >Phil Miller > >-----Original Message----- >From: michael brook [SMTP:walruss(at)optushome.com.au] >Sent: Tuesday, 25 June 2002 9:14 AM >To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 Questions > > > >The electric trim is fantastic. Definitely worth it and it makes a >difference to the way the machine performs. A couple of touches on the trim >can mean the difference of 3-4kts cruise. All you are doing is flicking a >switch and watching a led. It beats the hell out of a manual trim. > >The folding wing option is universally piloried by all those that have it. >I >know of 3 guys who got the folding wing option and didn't install it >because >they thought that it wasn't worth it. > >I'm going fllying in my beautiful machine > >mike2planes > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Lumkes, John Jr. <lumkes(at)msoe.edu> >To: >Subject: Zenith-List: 701 Questions > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > After being a lurker for quite a while, I am in the process of ordering >a > > 701 kit and attending the rudder workshop in August, picking up the kit > > while there. I have several questions: > > > > Most urgently: I have decided on the strobe kit, but am undecided on the > > electric trim or folding wings. Does anyone have any comments on the > > value/usefulness of these options? Is it easy to trim out with the >manual > > trim. If the wings folded easily with one person I would consider it >since > > it makes building a garage in my back yard (800' strip) easier. Since >this > > is down the road and the folding option is a retrofit, I am more >interested > > in the trim question. > > > > Down the road: Engine choices??? I have looked at the Rotaxes >(obviously), > > Hirth 2706 or F30, Jabiru (high rpm), and a Geo 3cyl-turbo or Geo 4cyl >with > > a Raven redrive. It would be fun to have a discussion/user experience >about > > these or any other engines people are using. > > > > Thanks for your time! > > > > p.s. Are there any 701's near Milwaukee that are being built or flying? > > > > ----------------------------------------- > > John Lumkes Jr., Ph.D., PE > > Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering

May 31, 2002 - June 25, 2002

Zenith-Archive.digest.vol-cx