Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:25 AM - Re: CH701with floats -- MTOW? Skyshop (Monty Graves)
2. 05:23 AM - Re: Re: CH701with floats -- MTOW? (bryanmmartin@comcast.net)
3. 05:31 AM - Re: ZAC Dinner (Greg Lamoree)
4. 05:42 AM - New Sport Pilot Limits and 601HDS (Phil Raker)
5. 07:01 AM - Re: New Sport Pilot Limits and 601HDS (Bruce Johnson)
6. 08:20 AM - Aileron Trim (Scott Laughlin)
7. 09:04 AM - Re: 601XL or RV9A? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
8. 09:23 AM - 701 nose bungee... (Bima, Martin)
9. 11:58 AM - Spinner size and sources (john H)
10. 05:19 PM - ZAC Dinner (Lance Gingell)
11. 05:35 PM - Re: 601XL or RV9A? (Ray Montagne)
12. 06:26 PM - flaps, flaperons of no help to LSA stall speeds (Jeff Small)
13. 07:44 PM - 701 Bubble Doors (Larry Martin)
14. 07:56 PM - Re: 701 nose bungee... (JERICKSON03E@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | CH701with floats -- MTOW? Skyshop |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Monty Graves <mgraves@usmo.com>
Chip,
What "Installation angle" did you change. On the floats, or the wings?
Monty
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Chip W. Erwin" <aircraft@czaw.cz>
>
>We changed the installation angle on the 701 which results in slightly
>longer take-off runs and significantly improved cruise. The 601XL does not
>hae the extreme rotation angles as possible with the 701 so the angle is
>already low on the 601.
>
>CHIP
>
>CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS
>LUCNI 1824
>686 02
>STARE MESTO, CZECH REPUBLIC
>TEL: +420 572 543 456
>FAX: +420 572 543 692
>USA FAX: 772-264-0936
>E-MAIL: AIRCRAFT@CZAW.CZ
>WWW.AIRPLANE.CZ
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: CH701with floats -- MTOW? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: bryanmmartin@comcast.net
-------------- Original message --------------
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gordon Duke"
>
> Please allow me to pursue my question about the effect of floats on max
> take-off weight. I do not see how floats can do anything other than eat up
> weight capacity. In my opinion, the issue is possible overstress of the
> airframe. The added structural rigging of floats may beef up the front of
> the fuselage, but does nothing for the wings and aft fuselage. If I am
> flying a 701 at more than 1100 pounds, how can I not have an increased risk
> of overstressing the airplane no matter what the source of the extra weight?
The floats are rigged to develop enough aerodynamic lift to carry their own weight so they do not reduce the usefull load of the airplane. The wings don't carry the weight of the floats so there is no additional load on the wings. See http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/floats.htm
> In support, I found that the Department of the Interior faced a similar
> question of flying amphibian C206's overgross by about 300 pounds. They had
> an extensive study and detailed specific directions for when this was to be
> allowed
This article deals with the effect of carrying extra fuel in the airplane in order
to increase the range of the aircraft.
The main concerns with floats are the reduction in performance due to the drag
and weight of the floats and the possible reduction of yaw stability due to the
forces on the floats, not an increase in wing loading.
--
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
Construction complete.
Waiting on the paperwork.
do not archive
-------------- Original message --------------
-- Zenith-List message posted by: "Gordon Duke" <GDUKE@CSOM.UMN.EDU>
Please allow me to pursue my question about the effect of floats on max
take-off weight. I do not see how floats can do anything other than eat up
weight capacity. In my opinion, the issue is possible overstress of the
airframe. The added structural rigging of floats may beef up the front of
the fuselage, but does nothing for the wings and aft fuselage. If I am
flying a 701 at more than 1100 pounds, how can I not have an increased risk
of overstressing the airplane no matter what the source of the extra weight?
The floats are rigged to developenough aerodynamic lift to carry their own weight so they do not reduce the usefull load of the airplane. The wings don't carry the weight of the floats so there is no additional load on the wings. See http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/floats.htm
In support, I found that the Department of the Interior faced a similar
question of flying amphibian C206's overgross by about 300 pounds. They had
an extensive study and detailed specific directions for when this was to be
allowed
This article deals with the effect of carrying extra fuel in the airplane in order
to increase the range of the aircraft.
The main concerns with floatsare the reduction in performance due to the drag and
weight of the floats and the possible reduction of yaw stability due to the
forces on the floats, not an increase in wing loading.
--
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
Construction complete.
Waiting on the paperwork.
do not archive
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Greg Lamoree" <zenithlist@randomminds.com>
I'll be at the show Tues and Weds... I'm tying to convince the folks I'm going
with to stay one more day so that I can make the dinner, but it doesn't look promissing.
Looking forward to seeing you all at the ZAC booth!
-----------------------
Rudder Done
Working on Horiz Stab
-----------------------
--
--------------------------
Greg Lamoree
Zodiac 601 XL
www.GregsPlane.com
--------------------------
--
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | New Sport Pilot Limits and 601HDS |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Phil Raker <phadr1@yahoo.com>
Yes, Tom,
There are some of us who have. I'm one who has designed and built a
system of drooping ailerons (flaperons) for the HDS. Both ailerons deflect
downward by about 15 degrees. Since they are almost full span, this should
have a significant effect on stall speed. Since I'm not yet flying, I don't
yet know HOW significant that effect will be. I'm hoping it will put me under
the 45KT barrier. Chris H. has approved my approach to the issue, but he has
asked me not make public the details of how I did it (There are other designs
out there, too.) until it's flying and I'm confident that all works well and is
safe. Then, I plan to write a brief article for the Zenair News.
For those who are anxious to know how well it works, I'm willing to accept
volunteered assistance in getting my plane in the air quicker than I can do it
alone. You just have to come to my humble airplane factory on Taxiway Alpha at
Y91, Lake City, MI.
A minor milestone passed yesterday - the plane now has TWO wings mounted!
Phil Raker N556P HDS/Stratus ~85% completed
>
> Time: 08:56:10 PM PST US
> From: "Tom Orsborn" <tom-orsborn@houston.rr.com>
> Subject: Zenith-List: New Sport Pilot Limits and 601HDS
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Tom Orsborn" <tom-orsborn@houston.rr.com>
>
> Has anyone explored what it takes to get the 601HDS at gross below the new
> Sport Pilot limits of 45 knots/52 mph stall speed.
>
> Tom Orsborn
>
__________________________________
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | New Sport Pilot Limits and 601HDS |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Johnson" <bruce@satx.rr.com>
The 45knot stall requirement is "clean", therefore your flaperons would have
to be "drooping" all the time to qualify.
Bruce
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Phil Raker
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 7:42 AM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: New Sport Pilot Limits and 601HDS
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Phil Raker <phadr1@yahoo.com>
>
> Yes, Tom,
> There are some of us who have. I'm one who has designed and built a
> system of drooping ailerons (flaperons) for the HDS. Both ailerons
> deflect
> downward by about 15 degrees. Since they are almost full span, this
> should
> have a significant effect on stall speed. Since I'm not yet flying, I
> don't
> yet know HOW significant that effect will be. I'm hoping it will put me
> under
> the 45KT barrier. Chris H. has approved my approach to the issue, but he
> has
> asked me not make public the details of how I did it (There are other
> designs
> out there, too.) until it's flying and I'm confident that all works well
> and is
> safe. Then, I plan to write a brief article for the Zenair News.
> For those who are anxious to know how well it works, I'm willing to
> accept
> volunteered assistance in getting my plane in the air quicker than I can
> do it
> alone. You just have to come to my humble airplane factory on Taxiway
> Alpha at
> Y91, Lake City, MI.
> A minor milestone passed yesterday - the plane now has TWO wings
> mounted!
>
> Phil Raker N556P HDS/Stratus ~85% completed
>
>
> >
> > Time: 08:56:10 PM PST US
> > From: "Tom Orsborn" <tom-orsborn@houston.rr.com>
> > Subject: Zenith-List: New Sport Pilot Limits and 601HDS
> >
> > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Tom Orsborn" <tom-
> orsborn@houston.rr.com>
> >
> > Has anyone explored what it takes to get the 601HDS at gross below the
> new
> > Sport Pilot limits of 45 knots/52 mph stall speed.
> >
> > Tom Orsborn
> >
>
---
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Scott Laughlin" <cookwithgas@hotmail.com>
Somebody posted a question about aileron trim a few days ago and I wanted to
respond, but accidentally deleted the message. If you still need
information on this, email me off-line and I can send you a drawing that may
help.
Scott Laughlin
http://www.cooknwithgas.com/
Website up and running
Working on front of fuselage.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Discover the best of the best at MSN Luxury Living. http://lexus.msn.com/
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
I think we will have to disagree, but that's OK I have no problem with
healthy argument and I will still fly the thing overgross on my
once/twice per year camping trip. I do have the following points
however...
1) there have been a number of 601's that have come out heavy (800lb
empty weights). These A/C have (with Chris Heintz permission) been
plated at 1300lb rather than the normal 1200. These A/C have had no
further structural modification. A 601HDS is not a fun plane to fly at
1260lbs, don't think I have ever have the need to hit 1300lbs so I would
call this MY personal limit.
2) I belive Cessna often have dual ratings, for their 172 (I believe)
i.e "normal category" for heavy gross weight and "utility category" for
a lighter plane. If you look at the difference between the categories
you will find that utility is +4.5G...same as the 601...but normal
category is less than this (can't remember what the number is) ...My
argument is that if the FAA is happy to accept a lower G limit for
"Normal airplanes" it would be reasonable to expect to be able to avoid
4G+ when flying straight and level, even in turbulence...Unless you want
to do aerobatics when loaded up...:)
3) I have been in turbulence where I have been banged from wing tip to
wingtip and I never felt anything like 4.5 G's.
4) Flying throught the wake of a DC 10 heavy was an interesting
experience last Friday...thank heaven for altitude...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ray
Montagne
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 601XL or RV9A?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Ray Montagne <ac6qj@earthlink.net>
On 7/21/04 12:47 PM, "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> but for on an occasional basis its OK.
I'm not intending to create a big argument but actually it is not OK -
ever. Drain a little fuel or leave something behind but please do not
fly over gross. You don't know when you might encounter unexpected
turbulence that may overstress a component, possibly not to the point of
immediate failure but weakening the component such that it no longer can
tolerate its original design limits. Be aware that light acceleration
forces may lead to catastrophic failure after overloading. Each
overload event is cumulative (ask any aerobatic pilot about cumulative
stress) and your betting your life (and possibly your passengers) that
you'll get away with this in the future because you've gotten away with
it in the past.
I'm not intending to argue. I am very concerned about your safety. I
would very much like to continue to see your posts to this list.
I refer you back to <http://www.bushplanes.com/background.html> and more
specifically, search the page for "REAL WORLD RAMIFICATIONS OF THE
PERFORMANCE OF THE EXISTING BUSH PLANE FLEET".
Best regards, Ray Montagne
Cupertino, CA
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 701 nose bungee... |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bima, Martin" <mbima@hydro.mb.ca>
Looking for bungee cord...
What are the specs of the 1,100 GW nose gear bungee?
Thickness, length, type, manufacturer, part number?
Thanks all,
Martin Bima
STOL-Vair
www.autobahn.mb.ca/~bima
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Spinner size and sources |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "john H" <professor71@hotmail.com>
I was wondering what spinner size people are using wit the big fish mouth style
cowlings. I have a 912UL with a 3 blade Warp prop
Thanks
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Lance Gingell" <lgingell@matrix-logic.com>
I'm probably going to attend the dinner. I get into ATW that afternoon.
..lance
601XL, Working on right wing
http://lancegingell.com/plane.asp
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Chuck Deiterich"
<cfd@thegateway.net>
Listers,
Is anyone planning to attend the July 29, ZAC dinner at Oshkosh? USA
Jabiru is
having a gathering the same day but Pete K. says it will last to after
dark so
I hope to go to it after the ZAC fling.
Chuck D.
N701TX
do not archive
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL or RV9A? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Ray Montagne <ac6qj@earthlink.net>
On 7/22/04 9:04 AM, "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> I think we will have to disagree, but that's OK I have no problem with
> healthy argument and I will still fly the thing overgross on my
> once/twice per year camping trip. I do have the following points
> however...
>
> 1) there have been a number of 601's that have come out heavy (800lb
> empty weights). These A/C have (with Chris Heintz permission) been
> plated at 1300lb rather than the normal 1200. These A/C have had no
> further structural modification. A 601HDS is not a fun plane to fly at
> 1260lbs, don't think I have ever have the need to hit 1300lbs so I would
> call this MY personal limit.
Obviously this is still within the design limits or Chris would not have
accepted the liability of approving such a thing. I doubt very much that he
would approve exceeding the maximum design limits. The specifications on
the XL on the ZAC web page are certainly published differently for Sport
Pilot (may no longer need to be different) than for Experimental. It is the
ultimate design limit that is important. If the maximum gross has been
artificially reduced then there is some margin to recover. Exceeding the
maximum design limit is a different story...
>
> 2) I belive Cessna often have dual ratings, for their 172 (I believe)
> i.e "normal category" for heavy gross weight and "utility category" for
> a lighter plane.
Yes, there is two categories but neither exceeds the maximum design limit
gross weight.
>
> 3) I have been in turbulence where I have been banged from wing tip to
> wingtip and I never felt anything like 4.5 G's.
I have! In VMC and virtually no winds aloft. No Tango Airmet either. Seat
belts very tight but my head hit the ceiling several times with substantial
acceleration. Count yourself lucky and I hope you continue to be.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Best Regards, Ray Montagne
Cupertino, CA
===========================================================================
Zenith Aircraft Zodiac CH-601-XL
Build Status: Rudder completed
Elevator Completed
Stabilizer Completed
Flaps Completed
Ailerons Completed
Right Wing Completed
Right Wing Tip Completed
Left Wing Completed
Right Wing Tip Completed
Fuselage Under Construction
NOTE: Heavy SPAM filters in place. Replies that do not include
the word 'Zenith' or 'Zodiac' will be rejected and will not
be viewable by me.
===========================================================================
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | flaps, flaperons of no help to LSA stall speeds |
Seal-Send-Time: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:26:53 -0400
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff Small" <zodiacjeff@msn.com>
from tonight's EAA e-mail hotline:
Question of the Week
Question for EAA Aviation Information Services:
Your summary of the final stall speed (for the sport pilot/light-sport aircraft)
rule confuses me a bit. If an aircraft that stalls at less than 45 knots
with flaps, can it qualify for LSA even if it stalls at a speed above 45 knots
without flaps, or is the only configuration that matters the "clean" stall
speed?
Answer
The aircraft must have a stall speed of 45 knots or less without the use
of lift enhancing devices. In other words, a clean stall speed of 45 knots or
less. Sorry, but the aircraft you describe in your question would not qualify
for operation by sport pilots.
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 701 Bubble Doors |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <earthloc@att.net>
I've had some trouble with the bubble doors I purchased from Zenith. Zenith put
me in touch with the manufacturer, LP Aero Plastics, Inc. The main problem
I had was that the holes for the snap vents were cut 1/8" to large. In addition
to that I was having a problem with the doors cracking.
My main question/concern was, why the doors were made out of Plexiglas/acrylic
instead of Lexan/polycarbonate. I am a firm believer in Lexan and thought that
the cracking problem was due to the brittle nature of the Plexiglas.
Following are the comments sent to me by the Vice President of the company.
Plus they are replacing my doors, which in my book says a lot for the company.
Lexan, polycarbonate sheet does have some very positive properties, but there
are some huge disadvantages, which were found out by various companies like Skystar,
Avid and Murphy.
1. Fuel drains are usually located on the underside of the wing near the door.
Any fuel drips onto a polycarbonate window will cause immediate crazing.
2. When heat formed, the optics on the polycarbonate sheet are considered poor
as compared to acrylic sheet.
3. Because of the very soft surface, polycarbonate windows will scratch simply
by rubbing your fingers across the surface. They cannot be polished back to
the original luster as the much harder acrylic sheet can be polished.
4. Normally kit manufacturers recommend use of "POP" rivets to attach the windows
to their frames. Buy using this method, polycarbonate windows craze around
these fastener holes. Normally acrylic windows are attached using windows mounting
channels, with no holes through the acrylic, or oversized holes through
the acrylic with mounting screws and nuts.
5. Polycarbonate windows will degrade faster than acrylic in the sunlight and
thus require more frequent replacement.
6. The manufacturing process is much more complicated to heat form polycarbonate
sheet thus making it a much more costly window to produce.
7. Polycarbonate windows are extremely rare in General Aviation, type certified
aircraft. Of over 1500 FAA-PMA windows that we manufacture, only one is made
of polycarbonate. These manufacturers understand the many benefits of using
acrylic sheet stock in the manufacture of their windshields and windows.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Best Regards,
George Mesiarik
Vice President & General Manager
LP Aero Plastics, Inc.
1086 Boquet Rd.
Jeannette, PA 15644-4707
www.lpaero.com
Office: 724-744-4448
Toll-Free: 800-957-2376
Fax: 724-744-3116
Larry Martin, N1345L
Take a look at my site. Larry's 701
---
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 nose bungee... |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com
See 701 SP print 7-L-1, P/N 1080 5/8" X 8" {inside dimension}
Wicks shows several, with that P.N. included and in that size. Different
weight's though. So call ZAC and ask for the weight & full PN for the SP.
In a message dated 7/22/2004 11:24:20 AM Central Daylight Time,
mbima@hydro.mb.ca writes:
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bima, Martin" <mbima@hydro.mb.ca>
>
> Looking for bungee cord...
>
> What are the specs of the 1,100 GW nose gear bungee?
>
> Thickness, length, type, manufacturer, part number?
>
> Thanks all,
>
>
> Martin Bima
> STOL-Vair
> www.autobahn.mb.ca/~bima
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|