Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:00 AM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again... (Elwood140@aol.com)
2. 05:06 AM - Re: Left vs. Right Tank (Zed Smith)
3. 05:53 AM - Re: Building a 701 (SkyKingN@aol.com)
4. 05:55 AM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again... (n801bh@netzero.net)
5. 06:41 AM - Fuel transfer option (Jake Reyna)
6. 06:42 AM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again... (ron dewees)
7. 06:56 AM - fuel flow (Ron Lee)
8. 06:57 AM - exp light sport bummer? (601corvair)
9. 07:47 AM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (N5SL)
10. 07:47 AM - Re: Re: Left vs. Right Tank (Dirk Slabbert)
11. 07:52 AM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (B Johnson)
12. 08:15 AM - My two cents on fuel... (Grant Corriveau)
13. 08:19 AM - Re: Fuel systems again (Fred or Sandy Hulen)
14. 08:33 AM - Fw: Prop Spinner for,701, 912ULS, Warp Drive HPL 3 R 914 (Carl Bertrand)
15. 08:52 AM - Re: My two cents on fuel... (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
16. 09:00 AM - Fuel selector valve placement (Craig Payne)
17. 09:06 AM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
18. 09:13 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
19. 09:22 AM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again... (Wayne @ Aircraft Engravers)
20. 09:55 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Craig Payne)
21. 09:55 AM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Bryan Martin)
22. 10:28 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Bryan Martin)
23. 10:34 AM - Re: Re: exp light sport bummer? (Jim Pellien)
24. 11:15 AM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Larry McFarland)
25. 11:20 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
26. 11:38 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Larry McFarland)
27. 11:48 AM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again (Larry McFarland)
28. 11:49 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Rico Voss)
29. 11:56 AM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Jim Pellien)
30. 12:07 PM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again... (Now in the 801 and 701) (Ken Szewc)
31. 12:10 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Bryan Martin)
32. 01:04 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Larry McFarland)
33. 01:26 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? ()
34. 01:39 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (cgalley)
35. 01:49 PM - Any Builders in Calgary? (David Barth)
36. 02:10 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
37. 02:17 PM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
38. 02:21 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Jim Pellien)
39. 02:25 PM - (Dee Callicoat)
40. 03:07 PM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
41. 03:57 PM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (nhulin)
42. 04:07 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Jeffrey Glasserow)
43. 04:31 PM - Re: Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
44. 04:36 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Jeffrey Glasserow)
45. 04:55 PM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (royt.or@netzero.com)
46. 05:34 PM - Re: Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
47. 06:08 PM - Re: Re: exp light sport bummer? (B Johnson)
48. 06:11 PM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (B Johnson)
49. 07:47 PM - Re:Oil cooling (ron dewees)
50. 09:26 PM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Thilo Kind)
51. 09:30 PM - Re: Prop Spinner for,701, 912ULS, Warp Drive HPL 3 R 914 (ABGS)
52. 09:34 PM - Re: Re:Oil cooling (Thilo Kind)
53. 10:02 PM - "Repositionable gear" (Tebenkof@aol.com)
54. 10:38 PM - Re: "Reposition able gear" (Bryan Martin)
55. 11:04 PM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again... (Now in the 801 and (Bryan Martin)
56. 11:58 PM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again... (Now in the 801 and 701) (Dabusmith@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: | Re: Fuel systems again... |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Elwood140@aol.com
In a message dated 1/25/2005 11:02:10 PM Central Standard Time,
n801bh@netzero.com writes:
The left one empties faster then the right one EVERY time. OK guys, I am all
Ben, your airplane is obviously left handed!
Larry Wood
(N701LW still aborning)
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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: Left vs. Right Tank |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
We need to hear from pilots in the southern hemisphere......
Rotation of the Earth, and the inherrent precession accompanying the built in "wobble",
is the root cause of the problem.
Proof of this can be found in your local "facility". Activate the flush valve
and observe the direction of rotation.
Also, since the Earth is tilted some 27 degrees, maybe you aren't flying level!
There is a logical explanation for everything.
Zed/701/R912/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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Building a 701 |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: SkyKingN@aol.com
when cutting holes in alu. with a hole saw remember to operate it in
reverse. It will not bind and damage your material. Hole will be quite smooth,
neat. Finish with a deburring tool.
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: | Re: Fuel systems again... |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "n801bh@netzero.net" <n801bh@netzero.net>
The left one empties faster then the right one EVERY time. OK guys, I am all
Ben, your airplane is obviously left handed!
Larry Wood
(N701LW still aborning)
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Larry, I was afraid of that...A proud builders worst nightmare. I will be signing
up poor n801bh for therapy and intensive consuling today...
do not archive
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: | Fuel transfer option |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jake Reyna" <jake@lockhart-tx.com>
Here's another suggestion for fuel transfer. It's called the HAN-D-PUMPT,
$12.84 , and is available at Tractor Supply part # 3958951. It's a pump with
a hose and nozzle that attaches to your gas can. I'm sure it's available at
other locations. I haven't used it, but for the price would give it a try.
Jake
do not archive
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel systems again... |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: ron dewees <rdewees@mindspring.com>
I wonder if anyone has noticed if the left tank is still the fastest
tank to empty when there is a passenger in the other seat. Maybe it's
as simple as not being balanced because of PIC weight left of center. On
my first few flights of my 601HDS I used only the header tank and had to
use full aileron trim to stay level. I was considering changing the
incidence in the wing when I decided to put 5 gallons of fuel in the
right wing tank and then the wing miraculously flew with no trim at
all. We sit close to the center of gravity but still put it out of trim.
Ron
N601TD
do not archive
n801bh@netzero.net wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "n801bh@netzero.net" <n801bh@netzero.net>
>
>
>The left one empties faster then the right one EVERY time. OK guys, I am all
>
>
>Ben, your airplane is obviously left handed!
>
>Larry Wood
>(N701LW still aborning)
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
>Larry, I was afraid of that...A proud builders worst nightmare. I will be signing
up poor n801bh for therapy and intensive consuling today...
>
>do not archive
>
>
>
>
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: "Ron Lee" <rlee468@comcast.net>
One never flies with the wings perfectly level, if the tanks are connected the
high one will empty sooner. Fluid seeks its own level. In essence you've built
a big ( water) gasoline level.
Ron. Tucson, AZ
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: | exp light sport bummer? |
0.20 FROM_STARTS_WITH_NUMS From": Zenith-List@matronics.com
--> Zenith-List message posted by: 601corvair <airvair601@yahoo.com>
OK guys Ive got a question that may be a result of tunnel vision that I need
sorted out. I should preface this by saying Ive had some interaction with the
national EAA on this and our local chapters. It involves the Sport Pilot rule
and registration of AC and specifically the HDS. We all know there is a potential
clean stall issue with the HDS. There has been much talk on how this could
be addressed and if VGs, extended tips, flaps that dont fully retract etc.
could reduce the clean stall speed and make it compliant. In short, is there
any builder mod that could/would help. After kicking this around awhile, I
decided I would call the factory and ask if they had any immediate plans to come
up with a plan/drawing of a modification that they believed would reduce the
stall. Didnt ask for a kit, just plans blessed by ZAC, that could be purchased.
The answer -which I will paraphrase -is that they were not really considering
it at this time because they were not s
ure how
the rule would be enforced or to whom you had to prove this and how. The responsible,
pragmatic, measured response I have come to expect from ZAC.
Well it just so happened that the next EAA chapter meeting was devoid a program,
so I decided to stir the pot with my story. It has always amused me how
10 pilots can have 12 opinions on an issue. While this is often not informative,
it makes for an interesting morning. I really thought I had studied the rules
pretty well before bringing it up, but some of my compatriots seemed to have
put more thought in it with the following general observation. Which was this:
If you have an experimental AC which could be ELS, you would be better
off registering it as solely experimental and forget the light sport. Then just
exercise the LS privileges in the AC when you , and it, are within the rules.
Like some of the J3 Cubs etc. The belief was that if you register it as
ELS, you give up potential night flight etc with no upside to it! I was not
really thinking in these terms and found the argument compelling. (The only negative
I could think of to this approach is that a
non-builder cant go to a 140 hr class and get repairman / condition inspection
privileges for the AC when its time to sell). This approach seems to be support
by the EAA and in the January issue of Sport Pilot, (page 24, left column)
they agree with the recommendation.
So I stirred the pot at the chapter meeting and figured I would do it here as
well. Thoughts anyone?
---------------------------------
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: | Re: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: N5SL <nfivesl@yahoo.com>
601corvair <airvair601@yahoo.com> wrote:
"The belief was that if you register it as ELS, you give up potential night flight
etc with no upside to it! I was not really thinking in these terms and found
the argument compelling."
Phill:
You make an excellent point that I had not thought of. Thank you for pointing
that out since I installed four (4) headlights - two on each wing.
Thanks again for bringing this to my attention!
Scott Laughlin
http://www.cooknwithgas.com/
FINALLY Riveting the top fuselage skins!
DO NOT ARCHIVE
---------------------------------
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Left vs. Right Tank |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dirk Slabbert" <dirkslabbert@telkomsa.net>
Zed, I'm in the southern hemisphere, checked the rotation thing in the washbasin
: clockwise!
Since the feul tap is on the LH floor, it follows that the feul lines to the RH
tank is longer, thus path of least resistance is the shorter LH tank.
Maybe torque effect tries to lift the left wing all the time, however little.
You may be right about the 27 deg though, we got mostly looong drops here, however
carefull my aim I always seem to hit bottom left.
Dirk 701
Bushpilot in Africa
----- Original Message -----
From: Zed Smith
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 3:03 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Left vs. Right Tank
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
We need to hear from pilots in the southern hemisphere......
Rotation of the Earth, and the inherrent precession accompanying the built in
"wobble", is the root cause of the problem.
Proof of this can be found in your local "facility". Activate the flush valve
and observe the direction of rotation.
Also, since the Earth is tilted some 27 degrees, maybe you aren't flying level!
There is a logical explanation for everything.
Zed/701/R912/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: | exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" <bjohnson@satx.rr.com>
Your HDS will NEVER be an eLSA. An eLSA has to have been a kit purpose
built to be an eLSA from the get go and built to the consensus standards.
So your only choice will be ab-experimental.
ANYONE can do maint. Etc to an AB-experimental, they just cannot do the
signoff for the annual inspection unless they have the repairman's cert.
Unlike standard certificated aircraft, you only need an A&P to sign off on
the annual, not an AI.
If ANY plane meets the weight, stall, cruise, and #seat rules it IS an LSA
(note, no "e" or "s" there) for the purposes of a Sport Pilot being able to
fly it.
I would imagine if you can establish during your 40hr testing period that
your plane stalls at 51mph, you would be golden... as far as someone
checking, the Zenith website says the HDS stalls at 54mph. It seems to me
it wouldn't take much to change that by 3mph. For that matter, I wonder
really, even "IF" someone checked, would the "checking" even be accurate
enough to detect that???
Now to your other point, an sLSA or an eLSA have NO restrictions on night
flight or flight above 10K etc, as long as the plane is properly equipped to
do so. It is ONLY a pilot flying as a Sport Pilot who has these
restrictions.
Bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of 601corvair
: Zenith-List@matronics.com
Subject: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: 601corvair <airvair601@yahoo.com>
OK guys Ive got a question that may be a result of tunnel vision that I
need sorted out. I should preface this by saying Ive had some interaction
with the national EAA on this and our local chapters. It involves the Sport
Pilot rule and registration of AC and specifically the HDS. We all know
there is a potential clean stall issue with the HDS. There has been much
talk on how this could be addressed and if VGs, extended tips, flaps that
dont fully retract etc. could reduce the clean stall speed and make it
compliant. In short, is there any builder mod that could/would help.
After kicking this around awhile, I decided I would call the factory and ask
if they had any immediate plans to come up with a plan/drawing of a
modification that they believed would reduce the stall. Didnt ask for a
kit, just plans blessed by ZAC, that could be purchased. The answer -which
I will paraphrase -is that they were not really considering it at this time
because they were not s
ure how
the rule would be enforced or to whom you had to prove this and how. The
responsible, pragmatic, measured response I have come to expect from ZAC.
Well it just so happened that the next EAA chapter meeting was devoid a
program, so I decided to stir the pot with my story. It has always amused
me how 10 pilots can have 12 opinions on an issue. While this is often not
informative, it makes for an interesting morning. I really thought I had
studied the rules pretty well before bringing it up, but some of my
compatriots seemed to have put more thought in it with the following general
observation. Which was this: If you have an experimental AC which could be
ELS, you would be better off registering it as solely experimental and
forget the light sport. Then just exercise the LS privileges in the AC
when you , and it, are within the rules. Like some of the J3 Cubs etc.
The belief was that if you register it as ELS, you give up potential night
flight etc with no upside to it! I was not really thinking in these terms
and found the argument compelling. (The only negative I could think of to
this approach is that a
non-builder cant go to a 140 hr class and get repairman / condition
inspection privileges for the AC when its time to sell). This approach
seems to be support by the EAA and in the January issue of Sport Pilot,
(page 24, left column) they agree with the recommendation.
So I stirred the pot at the chapter meeting and figured I would do it here
as well. Thoughts anyone?
---------------------------------
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
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: | My two cents on fuel... |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Grant Corriveau <grantc@ca.inter.net>
> Don't get me wrong your system is a good one but you would be foolish to
> try taking off without your Facets running and I would hate folks
> reading your post to simply dismiss the issue from the test you did.
My fuel system is functionally identical to Fred Hulen's - except I don't
have an engine pump (CAM100), so I have a third Facet pump on the firewall
that runs direct from the battery, anytime the ignition system is ON. (The
weight and low amp draw on these pumps makes this an easy addition.)
I didn't think Fred was suggesting this system should or even could safely
be flown in takeoff mode with the wing pumps OFF. I took his point to be
that in case of a wing tank pump failure enroute, there would still be the
legitimate possibility to continue the flight to destination, rather than
losing access to the fuel in that tank.
By moving the selctor from the usual 'Both' mode, to the tank with the
failed pump, fuel could safely be 'sucked' during enroute flight. Then,
approaching destination, ensure the pressure/tank pump on the other wing is
ON, and put selector to that side for landing.
This is only the 'backup' procedure that provides an alternate way to get at
all the fuel enroute and not have to divert halfway home after a failure.
--
Grant Corriveau
C-GHTF / HDS / CAM100
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: | Re: Fuel systems again |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61@comcast.net>
Frank,
I posted my message in hopes it would promote safety by suggesting that
builders find an established fuel system that had worked successfully in
another builders identical aircraft and engine type for a long time and copy
it rather than re-invent their own.
Instead of letting that suggestion have some potentially positive benefit,
you replied with 6 negative and/or assumptive comments. You then posted a
challenging comparison to someone else's engine out incident, a comment I
found to be very distasteful.. QUOTE: "What's the difference between the
test you did and the Eggenfelner example...not much I suspect!"
I've seen these kinds of responses too often from you. I'm done biting my
lip when reading the Zenith list for a while.
UNSUBSCRIBE
*Guys,.... keep building, the reward at the end is AWESOME!!!
Fred
do not archive
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: | Prop Spinner for,701, 912ULS, Warp Drive HPL 3 R 914 |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt@mondenet.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt@mondenet.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Prop Spinner for,701, 912ULS, Warp Drive HPL 3 R
914
> I have the same set-up. Recommend 8 to 81/2 for TO/ climb performance and
10
> to 11 for cruise. 9 is a nice compromise. Static should be 4900 to 5200.
>
Message 15
| 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: | My two cents on fuel... |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
No I don't think he was either, I was more coming at it from the
perspective of an uniformed reader looking at Fred's post and deciding
that VL was a non issue when in fact it is much more serious than that.
As I said Fred (and yourself) have a sound sustem from a VL perspective.
For a while I considerd having a third fuel pump for exactly that
reason...I.e what if a fuel pump failed when the other tank was close to
empty.
In the end I decided that was a second level of redundancy that was
really not required and MAY have have had VL problems at high
altitude/temperature. Added to that if the fuel level was so low that I
could't get to a local airport I really should have switched tanks a
while before.
This is also based on the fact there is a "local" airport round every
corner in Western Oregon.
If I lived in the middle of the desert it might have prompted me to add
the third pump.
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Grant
Corriveau
Subject: Zenith-List: My two cents on fuel...
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Grant Corriveau <grantc@ca.inter.net>
> Don't get me wrong your system is a good one but you would be foolish
> to try taking off without your Facets running and I would hate folks
> reading your post to simply dismiss the issue from the test you did.
My fuel system is functionally identical to Fred Hulen's - except I
don't have an engine pump (CAM100), so I have a third Facet pump on the
firewall that runs direct from the battery, anytime the ignition system
is ON. (The weight and low amp draw on these pumps makes this an easy
addition.)
I didn't think Fred was suggesting this system should or even could
safely be flown in takeoff mode with the wing pumps OFF. I took his
point to be that in case of a wing tank pump failure enroute, there
would still be the legitimate possibility to continue the flight to
destination, rather than losing access to the fuel in that tank.
By moving the selctor from the usual 'Both' mode, to the tank with the
failed pump, fuel could safely be 'sucked' during enroute flight. Then,
approaching destination, ensure the pressure/tank pump on the other wing
is ON, and put selector to that side for landing.
This is only the 'backup' procedure that provides an alternate way to
get at all the fuel enroute and not have to divert halfway home after a
failure.
--
Grant Corriveau
C-GHTF / HDS / CAM100
Message 16
| 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
I can't come up with a good place for the tank selector valve on a
center-stick 601XL. After sitting in my 80%-built plane I have ruled out
placing it on the floor or on a center console as it seems unreachable in
either location. A center console would seem the best location bud I can't
see easily turning it with my left hand in an emergency situation while
keeping my right hand on the stick.
How have others solved this conundrum? Am I overlooking something? This
concerns me enough that I am considering switching to dual sticks.
-- Craig
Message 17
| 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: Fuel systems again |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Fred,
It appears as though my passion around this issue has come across in a
negative or derogatory way. To show that I am not above reproach I
unconditionally applogise for communicating this way. It has never been
my intention to come across this way and as you have clearly been
offended by this then I am sure others have as well.
To all of you I am very sorry.
In my defence my only intention was to bring the issue to light and
hopefully prevent other builders ignoring the issue. At work I have the
privilage of leading a team of highly talented (and highly
opinionated...:)..) engineers. We debate like this all the time and our
system solutions have benefitted greatly from the kind of risk free
dialogue that we engage in.
Sometimes I suspect this style argumentative debate overflows into my
posts onto this list. Of course then it is out of context from the
conversation I have probably been in two minutes before.
We all run into each other at airshows and pilots are some of the most
helpful people around, I would hate for a relationship to be soured by
something I said on an email.
Best regards
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred or
Sandy Hulen
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Fuel systems again
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Fred or Sandy Hulen"
--> <hulens61@comcast.net>
Frank,
I posted my message in hopes it would promote safety by suggesting that
builders find an established fuel system that had worked successfully in
another builders identical aircraft and engine type for a long time and
copy it rather than re-invent their own.
Instead of letting that suggestion have some potentially positive
benefit, you replied with 6 negative and/or assumptive comments. You
then posted a challenging comparison to someone else's engine out
incident, a comment I found to be very distasteful.. QUOTE: "What's the
difference between the test you did and the Eggenfelner example...not
much I suspect!"
I've seen these kinds of responses too often from you. I'm done biting
my lip when reading the Zenith list for a while.
UNSUBSCRIBE
*Guys,.... keep building, the reward at the end is AWESOME!!!
Fred
do not archive
Message 18
| 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
I almost dare'nt suggest you don't need a fuel selector....:)
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
I can't come up with a good place for the tank selector valve on a
center-stick 601XL. After sitting in my 80%-built plane I have ruled out
placing it on the floor or on a center console as it seems unreachable
in either location. A center console would seem the best location bud I
can't see easily turning it with my left hand in an emergency situation
while keeping my right hand on the stick.
How have others solved this conundrum? Am I overlooking something? This
concerns me enough that I am considering switching to dual sticks.
-- Craig
Message 19
| 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 |
|
| From: | "Wayne @ Aircraft Engravers" <wayne@engravers.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel systems again... |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Wayne @ Aircraft Engravers" <wayne@engravers.net>
NO, NO Larry,
He's always flying a right downwind pattern so his left tank is higher and
gravity is emptying it into the right tank.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: <Elwood140@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Fuel systems again...
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Elwood140@aol.com
>
>
> In a message dated 1/25/2005 11:02:10 PM Central Standard Time,
> n801bh@netzero.com writes:
>
> The left one empties faster then the right one EVERY time. OK guys, I am
> all
>
>
> Ben, your airplane is obviously left handed!
>
> Larry Wood
> (N701LW still aborning)
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
>
Message 20
| 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
Yeah, I know. I bought the kit 80% assembled with the wings closed up. Also
I'm not keen on having pressurized fuel lines in the cockpit. So - no pumps
in the wings or the cockpit. I suppose I could run both L&R lines all the
way through the firewall and place two pumps there. Another point is that my
Corvair engine will have no mechanical fuel pump. So four electrical pumps
for redundancy?
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
I almost dare'nt suggest you don't need a fuel selector....:)
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
I can't come up with a good place for the tank selector valve on a
center-stick 601XL. After sitting in my 80%-built plane I have ruled out
placing it on the floor or on a center console as it seems unreachable
in either location. A center console would seem the best location bud I
can't see easily turning it with my left hand in an emergency situation
while keeping my right hand on the stick.
How have others solved this conundrum? Am I overlooking something? This
concerns me enough that I am considering switching to dual sticks.
-- Craig
Message 21
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Bruce is correct on this. As I understand the rules, an airplane can not be
registered as an eLSA until the consensus standards are finalized and the
kit manufacturer builds a conforming prototype and sells an eLSA kit based
on that prototype and then the plane must be built exactly to the plans with
no modifications. Any kits sold before the standards are finalized must be
registered as Ex AB. The only exceptions to the rule are the so called "fat"
ultralights which must be transitioned to eLSAs by the 2007 deadline.
on 1/26/05 10:52 AM, B Johnson at bjohnson@satx.rr.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" <bjohnson@satx.rr.com>
>
> Your HDS will NEVER be an eLSA. An eLSA has to have been a kit purpose
> built to be an eLSA from the get go and built to the consensus standards.
> So your only choice will be ab-experimental.
>
> ANYONE can do maint. Etc to an AB-experimental, they just cannot do the
> signoff for the annual inspection unless they have the repairman's cert.
> Unlike standard certificated aircraft, you only need an A&P to sign off on
> the annual, not an AI.
>
> If ANY plane meets the weight, stall, cruise, and #seat rules it IS an LSA
> (note, no "e" or "s" there) for the purposes of a Sport Pilot being able to
> fly it.
>
> I would imagine if you can establish during your 40hr testing period that
> your plane stalls at 51mph, you would be golden... as far as someone
> checking, the Zenith website says the HDS stalls at 54mph. It seems to me
> it wouldn't take much to change that by 3mph. For that matter, I wonder
> really, even "IF" someone checked, would the "checking" even be accurate
> enough to detect that???
>
>
> Now to your other point, an sLSA or an eLSA have NO restrictions on night
> flight or flight above 10K etc, as long as the plane is properly equipped to
> do so. It is ONLY a pilot flying as a Sport Pilot who has these
> restrictions.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: 601corvair <airvair601@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>> OK guys Ive got a question that may be a result of tunnel vision that I
>> need sorted out. I should preface this by saying Ive had some interaction
>> with the national EAA on this and our local chapters. It involves the Sport
>> Pilot rule and registration of AC and specifically the HDS.
>>
>>
>> So I stirred the pot at the chapter meeting and figured I would do it here
>> as well. Thoughts anyone?
>>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
In Phase I testing.
do not archive.
Message 22
| 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: Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
I have the original two valve configuration with the valves mounted low on
the front of the spar near the center. The passenger side valve is a bit of
a reach but not bad, I just make sure the shoulder strap allows me to reach
it as part of my pre-takeoff checks.
You can mount the valve on the floor under the center console and make an
extension for the handle so that the handle can be mounted on the top of the
console. I believe that's been done before. That way your fuel lines can run
downhill all the way to the gascolator and then uphill all the way to the
engine so that no air or water can get trapped in the lines.
It's not hard to switch hands on the center "Y" stick to fly left-handed and
use your right hand to reach switches and such. I can fly the plane with two
fingers on the stick and the plane will steer with rudder alone if
necessary.
In an emergency situation if you don't have time to switch tanks, you sure
don't have time to restart the engine. Fly the plane and find a place to set
it down.
on 1/26/05 11:59 AM, Craig Payne at craig@craigandjean.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
> I can't come up with a good place for the tank selector valve on a
> center-stick 601XL. After sitting in my 80%-built plane I have ruled out
> placing it on the floor or on a center console as it seems unreachable in
> either location. A center console would seem the best location bud I can't
> see easily turning it with my left hand in an emergency situation while
> keeping my right hand on the stick.
>
> How have others solved this conundrum? Am I overlooking something? This
> concerns me enough that I am considering switching to dual sticks.
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
In Phase I testing.
do not archive.
Message 23
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
Bryan,
I agree with everything you said except for one thing:
You stated:
"If ANY plane meets the weight, stall, cruise, and #seat rules it IS an LSA
(note, no "e" or "s" there) for the purposes of a Sport Pilot being able to
fly it. "
Not quite right: It also has to have a fixed gear and it cannot have an in-flight
adjustable
propeller. A ground adjustable prop is OK. Regarding Amphibious LSAs, the rule
regarding the
"repositionable" gear has been clarified by the FAA. Their clarification is that
it is OK to have
a "repositionable" gear, but it cannot be "repositionable" while flying.....only
on the ground.
This interpretation was not what people wanted to hear as there are a couple of
candidate Amphibs
being designed to meet the LSA rule that were designed with an in-flight repositionable
gear.
Jim
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Region
SportsPlanes.com
703-851-9375
www.sportsplanes.com
jim@sportsplanes.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Bryan Martin
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Bruce is correct on this. As I understand the rules, an airplane can not be
registered as an eLSA until the consensus standards are finalized and the
kit manufacturer builds a conforming prototype and sells an eLSA kit based
on that prototype and then the plane must be built exactly to the plans with
no modifications. Any kits sold before the standards are finalized must be
registered as Ex AB. The only exceptions to the rule are the so called "fat"
ultralights which must be transitioned to eLSAs by the 2007 deadline.
on 1/26/05 10:52 AM, B Johnson at bjohnson@satx.rr.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" <bjohnson@satx.rr.com>
>
> Your HDS will NEVER be an eLSA. An eLSA has to have been a kit purpose
> built to be an eLSA from the get go and built to the consensus standards.
> So your only choice will be ab-experimental.
>
> ANYONE can do maint. Etc to an AB-experimental, they just cannot do the
> signoff for the annual inspection unless they have the repairman's cert.
> Unlike standard certificated aircraft, you only need an A&P to sign off on
> the annual, not an AI.
>
> If ANY plane meets the weight, stall, cruise, and #seat rules it IS an LSA
> (note, no "e" or "s" there) for the purposes of a Sport Pilot being able to
> fly it.
>
> I would imagine if you can establish during your 40hr testing period that
> your plane stalls at 51mph, you would be golden... as far as someone
> checking, the Zenith website says the HDS stalls at 54mph. It seems to me
> it wouldn't take much to change that by 3mph. For that matter, I wonder
> really, even "IF" someone checked, would the "checking" even be accurate
> enough to detect that???
>
>
> Now to your other point, an sLSA or an eLSA have NO restrictions on night
> flight or flight above 10K etc, as long as the plane is properly equipped to
> do so. It is ONLY a pilot flying as a Sport Pilot who has these
> restrictions.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: 601corvair <airvair601@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>> OK guys Ive got a question that may be a result of tunnel vision that I
>> need sorted out. I should preface this by saying Ive had some interaction
>> with the national EAA on this and our local chapters. It involves the Sport
>> Pilot rule and registration of AC and specifically the HDS.
>>
>>
>> So I stirred the pot at the chapter meeting and figured I would do it here
>> as well. Thoughts anyone?
>>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
In Phase I testing.
do not archive.
Message 24
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
Does the eLSA rules say anything about how high you have to be to stall
at under 51 mph. It seems that in ground cushion, I could stall well below
the
rule, but that's only 4 feet off the runway..
Larry McFarland - Stratus 601HDS
Do not archive
>
> I would imagine if you can establish during your 40hr testing period that
> your plane stalls at 51mph, you would be golden... as far as someone
> checking, the Zenith website says the HDS stalls at 54mph. It seems to me
> it wouldn't take much to change that by 3mph. For that matter, I wonder
Message 25
| 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Well I would urge you not to put the pumps on the firewall under any
circumstances...blast or not.
If you take that approach it means there will be pressurised lines
somewhere other than the firewall which almost means it has to be the
cockpit.
You can always switch the pumps off as part of your engine out
procedure.
The only other thing that MIGHT work is to run pumps in the wings and
route the lines UNDER the cockpit, but I think that's not really giving
you much protection.
Incidently on the HDS I bolted the pumps after it was closed up...Don't
know what the available space looks like on the XL though.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
Yeah, I know. I bought the kit 80% assembled with the wings closed up.
Also I'm not keen on having pressurized fuel lines in the cockpit. So -
no pumps in the wings or the cockpit. I suppose I could run both L&R
lines all the way through the firewall and place two pumps there.
Another point is that my Corvair engine will have no mechanical fuel
pump. So four electrical pumps for redundancy?
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde,
Frank George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
I almost dare'nt suggest you don't need a fuel selector....:)
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
I can't come up with a good place for the tank selector valve on a
center-stick 601XL. After sitting in my 80%-built plane I have ruled out
placing it on the floor or on a center console as it seems unreachable
in either location. A center console would seem the best location bud I
can't see easily turning it with my left hand in an emergency situation
while keeping my right hand on the stick.
How have others solved this conundrum? Am I overlooking something? This
concerns me enough that I am considering switching to dual sticks.
-- Craig
Message 26
| 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: Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
Craig,
The center-console mounted tank-selector would be as good a place as
on the front face of the spar between your legs, but I can't see any crisis
with so short a lead time that you'd have difficulty getting to it. It's not
worth considering the dual stick option. I'm flying a y-stick and it's sooo
much
better than the dual type for getting in and out of the 601. My GPS is
clamp-
mounted on the stick as well and you can fly and change out batteries
without
letting go. I can also lay out a map right in front of me without
incumberences.
Just an opinion of course,
Larry McFarland - 601HDS - 50 hours at www.macsmachine.com
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
> I can't come up with a good place for the tank selector valve on a
> center-stick 601XL. After sitting in my 80%-built plane I have ruled out
> placing it on the floor or on a center console as it seems unreachable in
> either location. A center console would seem the best location bud I can't
> see easily turning it with my left hand in an emergency situation while
> keeping my right hand on the stick.
>
> How have others solved this conundrum? Am I overlooking something? This
> concerns me enough that I am considering switching to dual sticks.
>
> -- Craig
Message 27
| 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: Fuel systems again |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
Frank,
I've always understood, your posts were well put and often spiced with a bit
of pepper to place a strong opinion or emphasis, but only with the best of
intentions.
Appreciate your input, so don't give it up,,, and Fred, don't quit on us
either. We, or I
need this discourse to continue the learning process. Sometimes the
strength of
an argument seems to bite if you don't have a thicker skin or a slower
cognitive
activity like mine :-}
Hang in there guys,,,,,,,
Larry McFarland
Do not archive
>
> Sometimes I suspect this style argumentative debate overflows into my
> posts onto this list. Of course then it is out of context from the
> conversation I have probably been in two minutes before.
>
> We all run into each other at airshows and pilots are some of the most
> helpful people around, I would hate for a relationship to be soured by
> something I said on an email.
>
> Best regards
>
> Frank
Message 28
| 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Rico Voss <vozzen@yahoo.com>
> the wings closed up. Also
> I'm not keen on having pressurized fuel lines in the
>
re: pumps on firewall.
Craig,
I'm in the same situation -- wings closed up.. That's
why I'm still considering the single pump scenario.
But, (I'll tell him, Frank) unless the pumps are
self-priming (I dont think the Facets are; someone
please correct me if they are),
then your pump(s) MUST be located below the lowest
fuel level in your tank . Redundency doesn't fix
this. I'm not home, but I think the firewall is all
higher than the wing tanks.
This has been one of Frank's points -- that you cannot
"suck" (ie, lift) the fuel to the pump. that's a
definite problem with wing tanks if you dont want
pressure in cockpit.
This still isn't vapor lock, however.
[did I hear that horse take a breath]
--Rico
__________________________________
http://my.yahoo.com
Message 29
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
A light sport aircraft (either experimental or Special), or a standard aircraft
that fits the
performance envelope for a light sport aircraft (Some Luscombes, Taylorcraft, Aeroncas,
Ercoupes
etc), or an Experimental Amateur-Built aircraft that meets the LSA performance
envelope, all of
these are considered light sport aircraft. Any of these LSA can be equipped for
night flight and
flown at night by a private pilot. Similarly, these same LSA, if equipped for
IFR flight, can be
flown IFR by an appropriately rated Private Pilot. However, these same LSA aircraft
cannot be
flown at night or IFR by a Sport Pilot.
The limitation on night flight and IFR stem from the pilot's license, not from
the fact that an
aircraft is a Light Sport Aircraft.
Jim
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Region
SportsPlanes.com
703-851-9375
www.sportsplanes.com
jim@sportsplanes.com
----- Original Message -----
From: 601corvair
s.com
Subject: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: 601corvair <airvair601@yahoo.com>
OK guys Ive got a question that may be a result of tunnel vision that I need
sorted out. I
should preface this by saying Ive had some interaction with the national EAA on
this and our local
chapters. It involves the Sport Pilot rule and registration of AC and specifically
the HDS. We
all know there is a potential clean stall issue with the HDS. There has been much
talk on how this
could be addressed and if VGs, extended tips, flaps that dont fully retract etc.
could reduce the
clean stall speed and make it compliant. In short, is there any builder mod that
could/would
help. After kicking this around awhile, I decided I would call the factory and
ask if they had any
immediate plans to come up with a plan/drawing of a modification that they believed
would reduce
the stall. Didnt ask for a kit, just plans blessed by ZAC, that could be purchased.
The answer
-which I will paraphrase -is that they were not really considering it at this time
because they
were not s
ure how
the rule would be enforced or to whom you had to prove this and how. The responsible,
pragmatic,
measured response I have come to expect from ZAC.
Well it just so happened that the next EAA chapter meeting was devoid a program,
so I decided to
stir the pot with my story. It has always amused me how 10 pilots can have 12
opinions on an
issue. While this is often not informative, it makes for an interesting morning.
I really thought
I had studied the rules pretty well before bringing it up, but some of my compatriots
seemed to
have put more thought in it with the following general observation. Which was this:
If you have an
experimental AC which could be ELS, you would be better off registering it as
solely experimental
and forget the light sport. Then just exercise the LS privileges in the AC when
you , and it,
are within the rules. Like some of the J3 Cubs etc. The belief was that if you
register it as
ELS, you give up potential night flight etc with no upside to it! I was not really
thinking in
these terms and found the argument compelling. (The only negative I could think
of to this approach
is that a
non-builder cant go to a 140 hr class and get repairman / condition inspection
privileges for the
AC when its time to sell). This approach seems to be support by the EAA and in
the January issue
of Sport Pilot, (page 24, left column) they agree with the recommendation.
So I stirred the pot at the chapter meeting and figured I would do it here as
well. Thoughts
anyone?
---------------------------------
Message 30
| 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: Fuel systems again... (Now in the 801 and 701) |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Ken Szewc <szewc@direcway.com>
Gary, Ben,
I have noticed the same thing with my 701. I have both wing tanks
feeding a gascolator behind the pilot seat. I have noticed that one or
the other will drain faster, but does not seem to affect handling that
much. I also have extended outboard tanks in the same configuration.
With fuel in the outboard tanks I have let the inboard tanks drain all
the way down as a part of my test flying. One tank went completely empty
while the other had shown about 1/3. The airplane never did get starved
for fuel, even in climb attitudes or turns. I imagine that if I went
into a bank of 30 degrees towards the wing with fuel for long enough it
would starve. (and I would be dizzy)
One thing I have noticed with the zenith supplied fuel gauges is that
once the engine is running they indicate a higher than normal fuel
level. Because of this it is very hard to determine where empty is
precisely. I may put a voltage regulator on the fuel gauge power supply
to see if this fixes it.
As a precaution I always have fuel in the outboard tanks on long
flights.
As far as the gas getting onto the wing, this can be caused by filling
the tanks all the way up and the airplane sitting slightly unleveled.
The fuel from one tank will equalize through the gascolator to the other
tank and overfill it. I try not to fill the tanks to the top unless I am
taking off right away. Check valves before the gascolators would fix
this but it also adds complexity and a couple more failure points to a
simple already proven design.
Ken Szewc
N701SZ 76 hours
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Gower
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Fuel systems again... (Now in the 801 and
701)
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower <ggower_99@yahoo.com>
Ben, you are not alone...
Same happens to our two 701's
One plane has vented caps with a tube pointing to the front of the wing
with the "both, left ,right, Off english valve, The other one has the
"nomally vented" ZAC fuel tank caps that come with the kit with the
single "both, off" valve. Both plnes land with uneven fuel remaining
after about an hour or more flight.
One posibility we dicused in the club is: Because the gascolator is in
the left side of the fuselage and there is diferent amount of hose from
each tank to the gascolator, for the gasoline to travel... no other
explanation came up.
Our only concern is that this condition spils gasoline overboard
(stains over the wing coming from the caps). How much? we dont know
now. This will reduce the flight range in a long cross country fight,
as the electric fuel gauges are not accurate, might lead to an
emergency landing problem for fuel starvation, we think is kind of
serious, also less important, is the cost of that gasoline ;-)
Our longest flight has been of 1:43 at 87 mph @ 5,000 RPM. with a
diference of more that 1/4th of a tank betwen tanks (in the electric
gauges).
Any Facts or ideas will be apppreciated, one more thing: Both planes
fly with BOTH tanks at the same time (as ZAC plans) gravity feed,
engine (Rotax 912S) has mechanical pump.
We will like to understand and accept a logical explanation, before
thinking in the more complicated "left, right" valve
instalation/management of the gasoline in flight
Saludos
Gary Gower.
"n801bh@netzero.com" <n801bh@netzero.com> wrote:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "n801bh@netzero.com"
: I pretty much leave
my facet pumps on all the time and my left tank tends to deliver fuel
just a
bit faster than the right one. So, when I see the left tank .:
This happens to my 801 too. I went overboard to try and correct this by
venting the tanks to what I think is proper. I to have my fuel system
set up to draw out of both tanks at the same time. The left one empties
faster then the right one EVERY time. OK guys, I am all ears on why
??????????????????????
Ben Haas N801BH
---------------------------------
Message 31
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
The rule states that the MAXIMUM stall speed must not exceed 51 mph. Does
your airplane stall at a slower speed when it's out of ground effect?
From the rule:
Light-sport aircraft means an aircraft, other than a helicopter or
powered-lift that, since its original certification, has continued to meet
the following:
(1) A maximum takeoff weight of not more than
(i) 660 pounds (300 kilograms) for lighter-than-air aircraft;
(ii) 1,320 pounds (600 kilograms) for aircraft not intended for
operation on water; or
(iii) 1,430 pounds (650 kilograms) for an aircraft intended for
operation on water.
(2) A maximum airspeed in level flight with maximum
continuous power (VH) of not more than 120 knots CAS under standard
atmospheric conditions at sea level.
(3) A maximum never-exceed speed (VNE) of not more than
120 knots CAS for a glider.
> (4) A maximum stalling speed or minimum steady flight speed
> without the use of lift-enhancing devices (VS1) of not more than 45 knots
> CAS at the aircrafts maximum certificated takeoff weight and most critical
> center of gravity.
(5) A maximum seating capacity of no more than two persons,
including the pilot.
(6) A single, reciprocating engine, if powered.
(7) A fixed or ground-adjustable propeller if a powered aircraft
other than a powered glider.
(8) A fixed or autofeathering propeller system if a powered
glider.
(9) A fixed-pitch, semi-rigid, teetering, two-blade rotor system, if
a gyroplane.
(10) A nonpressurized cabin, if equipped with a cabin.
(11) Fixed landing gear, except for an aircraft intended for
operation on water or a glider.
(12) Fixed or repositionable landing gear, or a hull, for an
aircraft intended for operation on water.
(13) Fixed or retractable landing gear for a glider.
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
>
> Does the eLSA rules say anything about how high you have to be to stall
> at under 51 mph. It seems that in ground cushion, I could stall well below
> the
> rule, but that's only 4 feet off the runway..
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
In Phase I testing.
do not archive.
Message 32
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
Key word maximum,
I'll have to spend a little more time to find out the exactitude, but I
doubt it.
Thank you,
Larry
Do not archive
> The rule states that the MAXIMUM stall speed must not exceed 51 mph. Does
> your airplane stall at a slower speed when it's out of ground effect?
>
> Bryan Martin
> N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
> In Phase I testing.
Message 33
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <jeffglass@starband.net>
Re Max stall speed: I just went through this with the FAA... My HDS was
certificated with a max stall speed of 50 MPH during the fly off stage.
The 50 MPH is so stated in the builders log and certified to by the
builder. Hence, neither the FAA or the Insurance company had any trouble
accepting my plane as an Experimental LSA. Off the record, the FAA
examiner said ASI's at low speeds are nortoriously inaccurate so they will
take the builders statement as proof of stall speed.I did my own test at
gross weight and got a clean stall at 48 MPH. I waited for optimum
conditions, wind temp, etc. slow control movements to get the 48.
Jeff Glasserow
Ch 601 HDS
N6384E
Message 34
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
ELS plane CAN BE flown after dark BUT not by a sport pilot.
Cy Galley
EAA Safety Programs Editor
Always looking for ideas and articles for EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "601corvair" <airvair601@yahoo.com>
: Zenith-List@matronics.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: 601corvair <airvair601@yahoo.com>
>
>
> OK guys Ive got a question that may be a result of tunnel vision that I
need sorted out. I should preface this by saying Ive had some interaction
with the national EAA on this and our local chapters. It involves the Sport
Pilot rule and registration of AC and specifically the HDS. We all know
there is a potential clean stall issue with the HDS. There has been much
talk on how this could be addressed and if VGs, extended tips, flaps that
dont fully retract etc. could reduce the clean stall speed and make it
compliant. In short, is there any builder mod that could/would help.
After kicking this around awhile, I decided I would call the factory and ask
if they had any immediate plans to come up with a plan/drawing of a
modification that they believed would reduce the stall. Didnt ask for a
kit, just plans blessed by ZAC, that could be purchased. The answer -which
I will paraphrase -is that they were not really considering it at this time
because they were not s
> ure how
> the rule would be enforced or to whom you had to prove this and how. The
responsible, pragmatic, measured response I have come to expect from ZAC.
>
>
> Well it just so happened that the next EAA chapter meeting was devoid a
program, so I decided to stir the pot with my story. It has always amused
me how 10 pilots can have 12 opinions on an issue. While this is often not
informative, it makes for an interesting morning. I really thought I had
studied the rules pretty well before bringing it up, but some of my
compatriots seemed to have put more thought in it with the following general
observation. Which was this: If you have an experimental AC which could be
ELS, you would be better off registering it as solely experimental and
forget the light sport. Then just exercise the LS privileges in the AC
when you , and it, are within the rules. Like some of the J3 Cubs etc.
The belief was that if you register it as ELS, you give up potential night
flight etc with no upside to it! I was not really thinking in these terms
and found the argument compelling. (The only negative I could think of to
this approach is that a
> non-builder cant go to a 140 hr class and get repairman / condition
inspection privileges for the AC when its time to sell). This approach
seems to be support by the EAA and in the January issue of Sport Pilot,
(page 24, left column) they agree with the recommendation.
>
>
> So I stirred the pot at the chapter meeting and figured I would do it
here as well. Thoughts anyone?
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
Message 35
| 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: | Any Builders in Calgary? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: David Barth <davids601xl@yahoo.com>
Just wondering if there are any builders in the Calgary area as I will be in town
this weekend and might stop by for a visit if there is time. Thanks
do not archive
David
David Barth
601 XL Plansbuilder 15% done?
Working on Wings
www.ch601.org
---------------------------------
Message 36
| 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: | exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
I got 50.9999mph...I read it right off the ASI....:)
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
jeffglass@starband.net
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <jeffglass@starband.net>
Re Max stall speed: I just went through this with the FAA... My HDS was
certificated with a max stall speed of 50 MPH during the fly off stage.
The 50 MPH is so stated in the builders log and certified to by the
builder. Hence, neither the FAA or the Insurance company had any
trouble accepting my plane as an Experimental LSA. Off the record, the
FAA examiner said ASI's at low speeds are nortoriously inaccurate so
they will take the builders statement as proof of stall speed.I did my
own test at gross weight and got a clean stall at 48 MPH. I waited for
optimum conditions, wind temp, etc. slow control movements to get the
48.
Jeff Glasserow
Ch 601 HDS
N6384E
Message 37
| 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
No its still not Vapour lock but it very well might be.
Fumps on the firewall are subject to heat and sucking a long way from
the wing fuel tanks. By the time the pump has done with sucking thru
friction loss (thru all the tubes, fittings and maybe a
filter...NO!...:)..) and the head loss (lifting any vertical distance)
AND now the pump and fuel is warmed by the engine bay...Well this can be
(and has) turned into vapour lock.
Firewall mounted pumps are the very worse location imaginable for vapour
lock.
I think the Facets are actually self priming but it really is bad
practice to hope they will do so....Personally I wouldn't trust them.
They will always push, sometimes they may not pull....:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rico Voss
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Rico Voss <vozzen@yahoo.com>
> the wings closed up. Also
> I'm not keen on having pressurized fuel lines in the
>
re: pumps on firewall.
Craig,
I'm in the same situation -- wings closed up.. That's why I'm still
considering the single pump scenario.
But, (I'll tell him, Frank) unless the pumps are self-priming (I dont
think the Facets are; someone please correct me if they are), then your
pump(s) MUST be located below the lowest
fuel level in your tank . Redundency doesn't fix
this. I'm not home, but I think the firewall is all higher than the
wing tanks.
This has been one of Frank's points -- that you cannot "suck" (ie, lift)
the fuel to the pump. that's a definite problem with wing tanks if you
dont want pressure in cockpit.
This still isn't vapor lock, however.
[did I hear that horse take a breath]
--Rico
__________________________________
http://my.yahoo.com
Message 38
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
Jeff,
Your HDS cannot be an experimental LSA. There are no experimental LSA's or E-LSA's
in existence as
I write this note, because the consensus standards have not yet been issued for
E-LSA's.
What you have is an experimental amateur-built aircraft that has the performance
characteristics of
a light sport aircraft. It can only be certificated as an amateur-built experimental,
not as an
E-LSA.
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Region
SportsPlanes.com
703-851-9375
www.sportsplanes.com
jim@sportsplanes.com
----- Original Message -----
From: jeffglass@starband.net
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <jeffglass@starband.net>
Re Max stall speed: I just went through this with the FAA... My HDS was
certificated with a max stall speed of 50 MPH during the fly off stage.
The 50 MPH is so stated in the builders log and certified to by the
builder. Hence, neither the FAA or the Insurance company had any trouble
accepting my plane as an Experimental LSA. Off the record, the FAA
examiner said ASI's at low speeds are nortoriously inaccurate so they will
take the builders statement as proof of stall speed.I did my own test at
gross weight and got a clean stall at 48 MPH. I waited for optimum
conditions, wind temp, etc. slow control movements to get the 48.
Jeff Glasserow
Ch 601 HDS
N6384E
Message 39
| 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 |
|
1.16 MISSING_SUBJECT Missing Subject: header
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dee Callicoat" <flier53@hotmail.com>
Hi everyone, i would like info on installing cont. 0200 on a zenith 601
hds. . is there a firewall
forward kit available? How does performance campare with rotax 912. Thanks
and CAVU to all.
Dee
Message 40
| 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Oh yes...Forgot to respond to your last question.
The Subarus' don't have a mechanical pump either. I only run one pump in
each wing. Never emptied a tank in 351.2 hours...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
Yeah, I know. I bought the kit 80% assembled with the wings closed up.
Also I'm not keen on having pressurized fuel lines in the cockpit. So -
no pumps in the wings or the cockpit. I suppose I could run both L&R
lines all the way through the firewall and place two pumps there.
Another point is that my Corvair engine will have no mechanical fuel
pump. So four electrical pumps for redundancy?
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde,
Frank George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
I almost dare'nt suggest you don't need a fuel selector....:)
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
I can't come up with a good place for the tank selector valve on a
center-stick 601XL. After sitting in my 80%-built plane I have ruled out
placing it on the floor or on a center console as it seems unreachable
in either location. A center console would seem the best location bud I
can't see easily turning it with my left hand in an emergency situation
while keeping my right hand on the stick.
How have others solved this conundrum? Am I overlooking something? This
concerns me enough that I am considering switching to dual sticks.
-- Craig
Message 41
| 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: Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "nhulin" <nhulin@hotmail.com>
On Wed Jan 26 at 11:49 AM Rico Voss (vozzen@yahoo.com) wrote:
<snip>
(I'll tell him, Frank) unless the pumps are
self-priming (I dont think the Facets are; someone
please correct me if they are),
then your pump(s) MUST be located below the lowest
fuel level in your tank .
<snip>
Rico,
The Facet pumps under discussion are produced by Facet Purolator. Their web
site is http://www.facet-purolator.com/. You can find technical discussion
of the solid state pumps at http://www.facet-purolator.com/solidstate.asp.
You will notice when you look that the solid state pumps ARE self-priming.
If you have any further questions about these pumps you can call and talk to
their technical support at 607-737-8011. I've spoken to them and found them
very helpful and more knowledgeable about their products than anyone on this
list.
I am in no way connected with the manufacturer but when I need technical
information, I ask those who know best.
..neil
Neil Hulin
601XL/Corvair
Cincinnati
Message 42
| 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: | exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeffrey Glasserow" <jeffglass@starband.net>
I stand corrected!
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Pellien
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
Jeff,
Your HDS cannot be an experimental LSA. There are no experimental LSA's or
E-LSA's in existence as
I write this note, because the consensus standards have not yet been issued
for E-LSA's.
What you have is an experimental amateur-built aircraft that has the
performance characteristics of
a light sport aircraft. It can only be certificated as an amateur-built
experimental, not as an
E-LSA.
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Region
SportsPlanes.com
703-851-9375
www.sportsplanes.com
jim@sportsplanes.com
----- Original Message -----
From: jeffglass@starband.net
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <jeffglass@starband.net>
Re Max stall speed: I just went through this with the FAA... My HDS was
certificated with a max stall speed of 50 MPH during the fly off stage.
The 50 MPH is so stated in the builders log and certified to by the
builder. Hence, neither the FAA or the Insurance company had any trouble
accepting my plane as an Experimental LSA. Off the record, the FAA
examiner said ASI's at low speeds are nortoriously inaccurate so they will
take the builders statement as proof of stall speed.I did my own test at
gross weight and got a clean stall at 48 MPH. I waited for optimum
conditions, wind temp, etc. slow control movements to get the 48.
Jeff Glasserow
Ch 601 HDS
N6384E
Message 43
| 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: Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Intersting website.
Two points to note....
1) "will prevent vapour lock when correctly installed"...This means not
high up on a hot firewall.
2) Self priming to 18 inches?.....very nice...just don't try to do this
as part of normal operation with autofuel....Emergency backup pump is
kinda OK (in other words it might be there when you rarely need it) but
not your normal run pump.
They sure are sweet little pumps, mine have been running faultlessly for
351 hours...even better is the fact that local autoparts stores carry
them...Handy when a long way from home.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of nhulin
Subject: Zenith-List: RE: Fuel selector valve placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "nhulin" <nhulin@hotmail.com>
On Wed Jan 26 at 11:49 AM Rico Voss (vozzen@yahoo.com) wrote:
<snip>
(I'll tell him, Frank) unless the pumps are self-priming (I dont think
the Facets are; someone please correct me if they are), then your
pump(s) MUST be located below the lowest fuel level in your tank .
<snip>
Rico,
The Facet pumps under discussion are produced by Facet Purolator. Their
web site is http://www.facet-purolator.com/. You can find technical
discussion of the solid state pumps at
http://www.facet-purolator.com/solidstate.asp.
You will notice when you look that the solid state pumps ARE
self-priming.
If you have any further questions about these pumps you can call and
talk to their technical support at 607-737-8011. I've spoken to them and
found them very helpful and more knowledgeable about their products than
anyone on this list.
I am in no way connected with the manufacturer but when I need technical
information, I ask those who know best.
..neil
Neil Hulin
601XL/Corvair
Cincinnati
Message 44
| 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: | exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeffrey Glasserow" <jeffglass@starband.net>
I stand corrected!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Pellien
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
Jeff,
Your HDS cannot be an experimental LSA. There are no experimental LSA's or
E-LSA's in existence as
I write this note, because the consensus standards have not yet been issued
for E-LSA's.
What you have is an experimental amateur-built aircraft that has the
performance characteristics of
a light sport aircraft. It can only be certificated as an amateur-built
experimental, not as an
E-LSA.
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Region
SportsPlanes.com
703-851-9375
www.sportsplanes.com
jim@sportsplanes.com
----- Original Message -----
From: jeffglass@starband.net
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <jeffglass@starband.net>
Re Max stall speed: I just went through this with the FAA... My HDS was
certificated with a max stall speed of 50 MPH during the fly off stage.
The 50 MPH is so stated in the builders log and certified to by the
builder. Hence, neither the FAA or the Insurance company had any trouble
accepting my plane as an Experimental LSA. Off the record, the FAA
examiner said ASI's at low speeds are nortoriously inaccurate so they will
take the builders statement as proof of stall speed.I did my own test at
gross weight and got a clean stall at 48 MPH. I waited for optimum
conditions, wind temp, etc. slow control movements to get the 48.
Jeff Glasserow
Ch 601 HDS
N6384E
Message 45
| 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: Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "royt.or@netzero.com" <royt.or@netzero.com>
The facet (Puralator) fuel pumps ARE self priming. See http://www.facet-purolator.com/mcl/media/technology/hd_pdfs/Cubed_Solid.pdf. Do some experiments on your own to see how high above the fuel the pump can be and still self prime (dry lift). When I did this, years ago, I was surprised and impressed. I remember the pump self priming when it was about 20 above the fuel. I dont remember if I found the max distance for my experiment. Puralator used to have a tech sheet available for request which included specific recommendations about how to mount the cube solid state pumps. The outlet above the inlet with the pump at a 45 degree angle was ideal, otherwise the check valve may not work.
http://www.facet-purolator.com/mcl/media/technology/hd_pdfs/Posi-Flo_sheet.pdf looks like an updated replacement version of the solid state cube pumps.
FYI N601RT has a pair of leading edge wing tanks, a right side wing locker tank
all feeding downhill to a floor mounted 4-port fuel selector valve (3 in and
1 out). Handle for the selector is on an extension in the center console. Output
goes to a fuel filter (not paper), fuel flow sensor, splits at a T, goes to
parallel in cabin firewall mounted facet fuel pumps, joins at another T, through
the firewall to the gascolator, up to the Rotax mechanical fuel pump, to
rear of the engine to fuel pressure sender, then T to the carbs. I usually fly
with both pumps off. I use Chevron Premium auto fuel unless Im flying cross country
when I generally have to use 100LL.
On long flights, (5+ hours, landing w/45 min reserves), I use the fuel flow meter
in my EIS to drain tanks and know within ~10 minutes when the engine will start
to sputter. I have intentionally run each tank dry. (No not all on the same
flight.) When a tank runs dry, I switch to a tank with fuel and flip the pumps
on. The engine restarts quickly and easily.
Ive also turned the engine off in flight! (First time to do this was at 10,000
feet over an airport with multiple long runways.) The Rotax 912ULS (high compression
and PRSU) dose not freewheel when shut off. The engine restarts quickly
after being shut off.
I think it is valuable to know how the plane reacts when a fuel tank is run empty,
or when the engine is shut off. I believe the familiarity will help avoid
an emergency if one of these happens at an unexpected time. Just like learning
and practicing stalls in my mind.
Frank probably would not fly with me since my plane will vapor lock one day. I
know others who would not fly in Franks plane because it has a paper fuel filter.
Ahh, the joys of experimental aircraft.
Regards,
Roy
N601RT: CH601HDS, nose gear, Rotax 912ULS, All electric, IFR equipped,
318.1hrs, 405 landings
Message 46
| 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: Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Indeed Roy...:)
Now tell me why we don't like paper elements..Today was the first time I
have actually heard of a concern with these...Time to change mine
anyway...:)
Thanks
Frank
P.s Roy you already did fly with me...I thought it was just my crappy
seats you didn't like?.......:)
Frank probably would not fly with me since my plane will vapor lock one
day. I know others who would not fly in Franks plane because it has a
paper fuel filter. Ahh, the joys of experimental aircraft.
Regards,
Roy
N601RT: CH601HDS, nose gear, Rotax 912ULS, All electric, IFR equipped,
318.1hrs, 405 landings
Message 47
| 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" <bjohnson@satx.rr.com>
Ups... sorry your right, I was over-simplifying it...
Bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Pellien
Subject: Re: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
Bryan,
I agree with everything you said except for one thing:
You stated:
"If ANY plane meets the weight, stall, cruise, and #seat rules it IS an LSA
(note, no "e" or "s" there) for the purposes of a Sport Pilot being able to
fly it. "
Not quite right: It also has to have a fixed gear and it cannot have an
in-flight adjustable
propeller. A ground adjustable prop is OK. Regarding Amphibious LSAs, the
rule regarding the
"repositionable" gear has been clarified by the FAA. Their clarification is
that it is OK to have
a "repositionable" gear, but it cannot be "repositionable" while
flying.....only on the ground.
This interpretation was not what people wanted to hear as there are a couple
of candidate Amphibs
being designed to meet the LSA rule that were designed with an in-flight
repositionable gear.
Jim
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Region
SportsPlanes.com
703-851-9375
www.sportsplanes.com
jim@sportsplanes.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Bryan Martin
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Bruce is correct on this. As I understand the rules, an airplane can not be
registered as an eLSA until the consensus standards are finalized and the
kit manufacturer builds a conforming prototype and sells an eLSA kit based
on that prototype and then the plane must be built exactly to the plans with
no modifications. Any kits sold before the standards are finalized must be
registered as Ex AB. The only exceptions to the rule are the so called "fat"
ultralights which must be transitioned to eLSAs by the 2007 deadline.
on 1/26/05 10:52 AM, B Johnson at bjohnson@satx.rr.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" <bjohnson@satx.rr.com>
>
> Your HDS will NEVER be an eLSA. An eLSA has to have been a kit purpose
> built to be an eLSA from the get go and built to the consensus standards.
> So your only choice will be ab-experimental.
>
> ANYONE can do maint. Etc to an AB-experimental, they just cannot do the
> signoff for the annual inspection unless they have the repairman's cert.
> Unlike standard certificated aircraft, you only need an A&P to sign off on
> the annual, not an AI.
>
> If ANY plane meets the weight, stall, cruise, and #seat rules it IS an LSA
> (note, no "e" or "s" there) for the purposes of a Sport Pilot being able
to
> fly it.
>
> I would imagine if you can establish during your 40hr testing period that
> your plane stalls at 51mph, you would be golden... as far as someone
> checking, the Zenith website says the HDS stalls at 54mph. It seems to me
> it wouldn't take much to change that by 3mph. For that matter, I wonder
> really, even "IF" someone checked, would the "checking" even be accurate
> enough to detect that???
>
>
> Now to your other point, an sLSA or an eLSA have NO restrictions on night
> flight or flight above 10K etc, as long as the plane is properly equipped
to
> do so. It is ONLY a pilot flying as a Sport Pilot who has these
> restrictions.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: 601corvair <airvair601@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>> OK guys Ive got a question that may be a result of tunnel vision that I
>> need sorted out. I should preface this by saying Ive had some
interaction
>> with the national EAA on this and our local chapters. It involves the
Sport
>> Pilot rule and registration of AC and specifically the HDS.
>>
>>
>> So I stirred the pot at the chapter meeting and figured I would do it
here
>> as well. Thoughts anyone?
>>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
In Phase I testing.
do not archive.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Message 48
| 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: | exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" <bjohnson@satx.rr.com>
But it IS and AB-experimental LSA, in that every plane that meets all the
requirements is an LSA ... just not an eLSA <grin>
Bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Pellien
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: exp light sport bummer?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
Jeff,
Your HDS cannot be an experimental LSA. There are no experimental LSA's or
E-LSA's in existence as
I write this note, because the consensus standards have not yet been issued
for E-LSA's.
What you have is an experimental amateur-built aircraft that has the
performance characteristics of
a light sport aircraft. It can only be certificated as an amateur-built
experimental, not as an
E-LSA.
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Region
SportsPlanes.com
703-851-9375
www.sportsplanes.com
jim@sportsplanes.com
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Message 49
| 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: ron dewees <rdewees@mindspring.com>
Hi Listers,
I have now gotten about 4 hours on my Jab 3300/Zenair 601 HDS and have
persistent high oil temperature problems in climbout and throttle
settings above 2000 rpm. The FWF came from Jabiru about 5 years ago
and I don't know if there are changes in more recent FWF kits. I have
the old thin cooler and used Fred Hulens templates to build the mount
for the radiator. I have ordered the new, thicker oil cooler and will
experiment with it when it arrives. Do the factory mounting brackets
for the oil cooler hold it closer to the crankcase and provide good
clearance from the crankcase?
Today I took a good look at my radiator's position and see that it
is almost touching the cowl on both ends-- sort of like a bow string
across the arch of the lower cowl. This leaves only about 1 inch max
clearance near the middle of the radiator for hot air to exit. Could
anyone with a Jab/601 tell me how much clearance there is between the
oil radiator and the cowl?
Thanks for ideas
Ron DeWees
N601TD
>
Message 50
| 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: Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
Hi folks,
let me play Frank for a while: do not suck fuel uphill or horizontally over
longer distances for example such as from the wing tanks to the firewall.
Also avoid obstacles such as filters in the suction lines.
Even though the fuel might flow to the pumps and provide priming of the
pumps - as Rico pointed out - once the pumps are in operation and the fuel
flow to the engine is high (during take-off) you will create a low pressure
situation in the fuel lines. Under the right circumstances (temperatures,
alltitude, fuel flow, type of fuel, etc.) the pressure in the suction line
will be low enough, so that the fuel will evaporate and - voila - vapour
lock. It's simple physics.
Again, there might be folks out there, happily flying for quite some time
with their fuel pump all the way on the engine side of the fire wall, but
sooner or later it will happen.
Oh, and forget about thinks like "no problem, I can always switch fuel
pumps, do this or the other thing". If the engine looses power during
take-off your mind will go in hyperdrive and you will forget the most basic
things. How do I know? Mine did this last year (not caused by vapour lock,
though). Barely made it over the threes....
There is only one possible setup when using wing tanks feeding directly to
the engine: pumps close the tanks, which means the wing bays in our case.
Coincidently, such a setup will also allow you to use the pumps for
switching tanks, making a left / right valve unneccessary - you still should
have a possibility of closing the fuel lines for each tank for maintenance
reasons or in case of inflight fire.
Fred (and all others): please stay on the list. I really would hate to see
you go. Frank really knows the fluid stuff. His compassion might carry him
sometimes away ( he and I had some arguements as well), but he definetely is
not into slamming people, but helping to avoid one of the most causes for
accidents in the homebuilder area.
Sorry for the lenghty e-mail.
Happy building / flying (and snow shuffeling for those of you in the North
East...)
Thilo Kind
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rico Voss" <vozzen@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Fuel selector valve placement
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Rico Voss <vozzen@yahoo.com>
>
>
> > the wings closed up. Also
> > I'm not keen on having pressurized fuel lines in the
> >
> re: pumps on firewall.
>
> Craig,
> I'm in the same situation -- wings closed up.. That's
> why I'm still considering the single pump scenario.
>
> But, (I'll tell him, Frank) unless the pumps are
> self-priming (I dont think the Facets are; someone
> please correct me if they are),
> then your pump(s) MUST be located below the lowest
> fuel level in your tank . Redundency doesn't fix
> this. I'm not home, but I think the firewall is all
> higher than the wing tanks.
>
> This has been one of Frank's points -- that you cannot
> "suck" (ie, lift) the fuel to the pump. that's a
> definite problem with wing tanks if you dont want
> pressure in cockpit.
>
> This still isn't vapor lock, however.
> [did I hear that horse take a breath]
> --Rico
>
>
> __________________________________
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
Message 51
| 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: Prop Spinner for,701, 912ULS, Warp Drive HPL 3 R 914 |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "ABGS" <abgs@impulse.net.au>
Have a look at the spinners at www.cumminsspinners.com
they look pretty good
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt@mondenet.com>
Subject: Fw: Zenith-List: Prop Spinner for,701, 912ULS, Warp Drive HPL 3 R
914
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt@mondenet.com>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt@mondenet.com>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Prop Spinner for,701, 912ULS, Warp Drive HPL 3 R
> 914
>
>
> > I have the same set-up. Recommend 8 to 81/2 for TO/ climb performance
and
> 10
> > to 11 for cruise. 9 is a nice compromise. Static should be 4900 to 5200.
> >
>
>
Message 52
| 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: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
Hi Ron,
although I have a Rotax 912 I had the same issue at the beginning with the
oil temps. Tried everything, but nothing work - until i made sure, the the
air flowing through the oil cooler could actually exit the cowling. You need
to channel the air to the exit and make sure, that the exit is actually a
low pressure area (adding a small lip, etc.).
I had oil temps as high as 260 F. with the air exit optimized Im running
below 200 F.
Good luck
Thilo Kind
----- Original Message -----
From: "ron dewees" <rdewees@mindspring.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: ron dewees <rdewees@mindspring.com>
>
> Hi Listers,
> I have now gotten about 4 hours on my Jab 3300/Zenair 601 HDS and have
> persistent high oil temperature problems in climbout and throttle
> settings above 2000 rpm. The FWF came from Jabiru about 5 years ago
> and I don't know if there are changes in more recent FWF kits. I have
> the old thin cooler and used Fred Hulens templates to build the mount
> for the radiator. I have ordered the new, thicker oil cooler and will
> experiment with it when it arrives. Do the factory mounting brackets
> for the oil cooler hold it closer to the crankcase and provide good
> clearance from the crankcase?
> Today I took a good look at my radiator's position and see that it
> is almost touching the cowl on both ends-- sort of like a bow string
> across the arch of the lower cowl. This leaves only about 1 inch max
> clearance near the middle of the radiator for hot air to exit. Could
> anyone with a Jab/601 tell me how much clearance there is between the
> oil radiator and the cowl?
> Thanks for ideas
> Ron DeWees
> N601TD
>
> >
>
>
Message 53
| 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: | "Repositionable gear" |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Tebenkof@aol.com
Jim,
I guess I could track this down somewhere, but you seem to know what you are
talking about. This question applies to flying an AB experimental with a
sport pilot license (and a thousand hours in lake amphibians - but I know that
doesn't count when I let my medical go.) Now that the FAA has "clarified"
repositionable gear I am completely confused. You cannot take off from the airport,
pull up the wheels, and land on the water? Or the other way around?
Sounds like that is not much different from spending a few hours switching
wheels to straight floats and trying to figure out how to get away from the
airport. Am I missing something? I hope.
Jim Greenough
701 in Portland, OR
Message 54
| 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: "Reposition able gear" |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Thats the way I read it. The landing gear must remain in the same position
from takeoff to landing.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
In Phase I testing.
do not archive.
I suppose you could taxi down a ramp into the water then reposition the gear
for a water takeoff and reverse the procedure after landing. In order to
transition from land use to water use you will either have to find an
airport with both runways and water or transport the plane over land from
the runway to the water.
on 1/27/05 12:59 AM, Tebenkof@aol.com at Tebenkof@aol.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Tebenkof@aol.com
>
> Jim,
>
> I guess I could track this down somewhere, but you seem to know what you are
> talking about. This question applies to flying an AB experimental with a
> sport pilot license (and a thousand hours in lake amphibians - but I know that
> doesn't count when I let my medical go.) Now that the FAA has "clarified"
> repositionable gear I am completely confused. You cannot take off from the
> airport,
> pull up the wheels, and land on the water? Or the other way around?
>
> Sounds like that is not much different from spending a few hours switching
> wheels to straight floats and trying to figure out how to get away from the
> airport. Am I missing something? I hope.
>
Message 55
| 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 |
|
701)
| Subject: | Re: Fuel systems again... (Now in the 801 and |
701)
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
on 1/26/05 3:06 PM, Ken Szewc at szewc@direcway.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Ken Szewc <szewc@direcway.com>
>
> One tank went completely empty
> while the other had shown about 1/3. The airplane never did get starved
> for fuel, even in climb attitudes or turns. I imagine that if I went
> into a bank of 30 degrees towards the wing with fuel for long enough it
> would starve. (and I would be dizzy)
>
Only if you were using a whole lot of opposite rudder. In a coordinated turn
the fuel will stay level in the tanks and would actually flow easier due to
the higher G load. The only time the fuel will shift from side to side in
the tanks is when the airplane is in a skid or slip.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
In Phase I testing.
do not archive.
Message 56
| 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: Fuel systems again... (Now in the 801 and 701) |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Dabusmith@aol.com
>Any Facts or ideas will be appreciated, one more thing: Both planes fly
with BOTH tanks at the same time (as ZAC plans) gravity feed, engine (Rotax
912S) has mechanical pump.
I had one tank draining faster than the other my first few flights. The
problem was at the flex hose from one of the wing tanks. The inside of the fuel
line had bulged at the fitting causing a restriction. I put the same amount of
fuel in both tanks. I drained the fuel back out through the gas collator. the
right tank was much slower than the left. It was easy to check each fitting
starting from the tank. My tanks drain evenly now if I fly wings level.
I have sealed the supplied fuel cap vents and silver soldered 1/4" vent
tubes on them. It has helped minimize but not eliminate fuel stains on the wing.
Darned if I know why. It has done nothing to the fuel burn (exactly 4gph at
5500 rpm still). One really nice benefit with the vent tubes is the ability to
see that the fuel caps are installed from the cockpit.
Dave Smith
N701XL 352 hrs 912ULS
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! --
|