Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:52 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Craig Payne)
2. 12:56 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Craig Payne)
3. 02:07 AM - Re: Re:Oil cooling (thobgret)
4. 04:46 AM - Re: Re:Oil cooling (Crvsecretary@aol.com)
5. 04:52 AM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Jeffrey Glasserow)
6. 05:38 AM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Tommy Walker)
7. 06:00 AM - Re: How to License Your Homebuilt Aircraft (DICK WILBERS)
8. 06:38 AM - Re: exp light sport bummer? (Gig Giacona)
9. 06:51 AM - Re: Re:Oil cooling (Thilo Kind)
10. 06:53 AM - Re: Re:Oil cooling (cgalley)
11. 07:02 AM - Re: "Reposition able gear" (B Johnson)
12. 07:34 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
13. 09:21 AM - Re: Fuel selector valve placement (Leo J. Corbalis)
14. 09:46 AM - My firewall pump and system description (Grant Corriveau)
15. 10:09 AM - Re: Fuel System & ZAC (Mike)
16. 10:36 AM - Re: Fuel System & ZAC (N5SL)
17. 11:30 AM - Re: Re: Fuel systems again... (Now in the 801 and 701) (JERICKSON03E@aol.com)
18. 11:53 AM - Re: Re:Oil cooling (Crvsecretary@aol.com)
19. 12:13 PM - Flight Testing (Chuck Deiterich)
20. 01:03 PM - Re: Fuel System & ZAC (nhulin)
21. 03:09 PM - 601XL flap torque tube long? (Mark Stauffer)
22. 03:29 PM - Pictures (Cdngoose)
23. 03:29 PM - Re: 601XL flap torque tube long? (Bill Howerton)
24. 04:26 PM - Re: "Reposition able gear" Skyshop (Skyshop)
25. 04:45 PM - Re: 601XL flap torque tube long? (nhulin)
26. 04:47 PM - Re: 601XL flap torque tube long? (Mike)
27. 06:45 PM - Re: Pictures (ron dewees)
28. 07:23 PM - Re: Any Builders in Calgary? (Dave & Darlene)
29. 09:00 PM - dent in skin repair? (Joe Nance)
30. 11:17 PM - Fixing dents (Howard Carter)
31. 11:24 PM - Re: dent in skin repair? (Bryan Martin)
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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
Just to add "fuel to the fire" here is what William Wynne (a man of strong
opinions) does in his 601XL/Corvair: two pumps on the firewall, no engine
pump and a fuel selector on the center console:
http://www.flycorvair.com/601Sep2004.html - about a third of the way down
the page.
Don't argue with me about it - I don't have enough knowledge yet to endorse
or reject his design ;-)
-- 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>
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 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
I think I see away to address all the requirements: mount the fuel pumps in
the cockpit such that they butt-up against the firewall and the outlet
fitting pokes through the firewall.
- the lines from the tanks to the pumps stays low
- the pumps stay low
- the pumps stay cool
- no selector valve
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>
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 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "thobgret" <thobgret@wanadoo.fr>
Thilo,
200 F is rather low; to evaporate possibly accumulated condensation water,
at least every time you fly 212 F must be reached.
Thoby Piek CH701 Rotax912 360H
France
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
> --> 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.
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com
Hello Thoby:
I agree the oil must see 212 F, but the oil temp sender is located in the
oil tank...the COOLEST temps the oil sees. I would think that oil sees much
higher temps than 212 travelling around the cylinder heads.
I see the same thing happen in my Harley, and the HD doesn't even have an
oil cooler.
Your thoughts?
Tracy
601XL
tail 85%
do not archive
In a message dated 1/27/2005 5:08:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
thobgret@wanadoo.fr writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "thobgret" <thobgret@wanadoo.fr>
Thilo,
200 F is rather low; to evaporate possibly accumulated condensation water,
at least every time you fly 212 F must be reached.
Thoby Piek CH701 Rotax912 360H
France
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
> --> 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.
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: | exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeffrey Glasserow" <jeffglass@starband.net>
So you're good to go as an LSA!
DO NOT ARCHIVE
-----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: 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 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: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Tommy Walker" <twalker@cableone.net>
... 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....
I agree with your compatriots. We plan to register our 701 as an
experimental and fly it as a sports plane. My building buddy will still be
able to fly it under experimental regulations and I, sans medical, will fly
as Sport Pilot.
(putting on flame suit so I can listen to those 10 pilots with 12
opinions.... ;->....)
Tommy Walker in Alabama
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: How to License Your Homebuilt Aircraft |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "DICK WILBERS" <RWILBERS@TAMPABAY.RR.COM>
Thanks Jon, this will be a trmendous help.
Dick Wilbers 99% complete 601HDS in Florida
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Croke" <jon@joncroke.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: How to License Your Homebuilt Aircraft
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jon Croke" <jon@joncroke.com>
>
> This is an advertisement to announce that www.HomebuiltHELP.com has just
> completed production, and is proud to announce the release of their latest
> DVD video presentation: "How to License Your Homebuilt Aircraft". (for
> the U.S.)
>
> To the best of our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive DVD video
> that explains in detail the complete licensing process for experimental
> amateur built aircraft - showing what/how to fill out the forms, and also
> demonstrating new capabilities such as reserving an N number by going
> online and using the FAA website.
>
> I'll leave it at that, as full details are available at the
> www.HomebuiltHELP.com website.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jon
>
>
>
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: | Re: exp light sport bummer? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox-internet.com>
There is a lot of misunderstanding about the ELSA classification. You can
never register your HDS as E-LSA. For that matter I can't register my XL as
E-LSA. Both of us must register our planes under Experimental-Homebuilt.
BUT... if our aircraft fit the LSA rules we can fly them under the LSA
rules.
The E-LSA will be limited to kits that are specificlly designed for the
catagory. The downside is that you will not be able to deviate at all from
the approved plans. The upside is the 51% rule will not be in force.
Gig G
--> 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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
Hi folks,
the oil temperature probe at the Rotax 912 is located near the oil pump
below the engine. The oil reservoir has no probe.
I see around 195 F for the oil in cruise and level. During take off and
climb the oil gets to 230F, so I assume I don't have an issue with water.
Best regards
Thilo Kind
----- Original Message -----
From: <Crvsecretary@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com
>
>
> Hello Thoby:
>
> I agree the oil must see 212 F, but the oil temp sender is located in the
> oil tank...the COOLEST temps the oil sees. I would think that oil sees
much
> higher temps than 212 travelling around the cylinder heads.
>
> I see the same thing happen in my Harley, and the HD doesn't even have an
> oil cooler.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> Tracy
> 601XL
> tail 85%
> do not archive
>
>
> In a message dated 1/27/2005 5:08:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> thobgret@wanadoo.fr writes:
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "thobgret" <thobgret@wanadoo.fr>
>
> Thilo,
>
> 200 F is rather low; to evaporate possibly accumulated condensation
water,
> at least every time you fly 212 F must be reached.
>
>
> Thoby Piek CH701 Rotax912 360H
> France
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
>
>
> > --> 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.
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
This is NOT true. Water will evaporate even when it is frozen. Most engine
experts like to see about 180 F to get the best rate of evaporation with
the best lubrication protection.
Cy Galley - Chair,
AirVenture Emergency Aircraft Repair
A Service Project of Chapter 75
EAA Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "thobgret" <thobgret@wanadoo.fr>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "thobgret" <thobgret@wanadoo.fr>
>
> Thilo,
>
> 200 F is rather low; to evaporate possibly accumulated condensation water,
> at least every time you fly 212 F must be reached.
>
>
> Thoby Piek CH701 Rotax912 360H
> France
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
>
>
> > --> 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.
>
>
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: | "Reposition able gear" |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" <bjohnson@satx.rr.com>
Yep,
You gotta fly from your airport to another airport that has a "boat ramp",
taxi into the water, get out and retract the gear, then fly to the lake you
wanted, then fly back to the lake where the boat ramp airport is, then get
out and extend the gear, then taxi up the boat ramp, then take off to your
home airport.
In other words, unless you happen to keep your plane at a land airport with
"boat ramp" access, or keep your plane in the water all the time, don't
bother.
It is my expectation that this will be changed at some point during the next
couple years, and/or some manufacturer will somehow come up with floats that
can be landed in the water with the wheels still sticking out (can't really
imagine how though... maybe "really skinny rollerblade-type wheels?? >:) )
Bruce (not yet a pilot, but extensively studied all this sport pilot stuff)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bryan Martin
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: "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.
>
--
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 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: | Fuel selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Me get carried away?....:)
I'll let you into a secret...I just took over a project at work where
the engineering team were trying to pump hot sulfuric acid nearly 1/4 of
a mile...No problem with enough pressure right?
Problem was the high temp meant they were limited to 25 psi in the
plastic pipe...still not a problem until yours truly points out that
sulfuric weighs 1.84 times as much as water and they were trying to lift
the fluid 17 feet...well they had 3psi left to cover the friction loss
of 1/4 of a mile of pipe!!!
"BUT mr Hinde our hydraulic modelling shows it will work"...."Oh you
mean the acid will cool down?"...usually does in a plastic pipe in if
left idle for 12 hours..."Oh we thought it would stay hot"....sulfuric
is 20 times thicker than water at ambient temperature.
I spotted this in 20 minutes...this team had been working on this for 18
months and the desigh is junk...start again...
Can ou imagine the assertive conversations I had around that one?.....:)
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Thilo Kind
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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 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 selector valve placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Leo J. Corbalis" <leocorbalis@sbcglobal.net>
Keep your shoulder harness tight. Takeoff is your MOST maximum performance
manuver. This is when you might need a tight harness to cut down your dental
bill. Loosen, switch tanks, tighten, in that order.
Always expect the worst and be happily disappointed.
Leo Corbalis Maj. USAF Ret.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Martin" <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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 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: | My firewall pump and system description |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Grant Corriveau <grantc@ca.inter.net>
> 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.
I agree -- it is essential to be aware of these points when deciding to
include a firewall fuel pump in the system.
My aircraft experienced some intermittant loss of power moments, under 'hot'
conditions that turned out to be caused by a poorly manufactured ignition
component. While 'zeroing in' on the problem, I had to 'bullet proof' my
fuel system as much as possible against vapour lock to remove that as a
possible cause.
My firewall fuel pump is mounted as low as practicable - just above the
gascolator. I haven't actually measured -- but due to wing dihedral of the
HDS, the firewall pump is probably below the fuel 'head' level much of the
time, and I think it would be hard to get it more than 12" above the lowest
point in the tank...
The fuel pump and lines are on the 'cool' side of my engine room (Honda
conversion CAM100) as far from the exhaust stacks as feasible. Also there
is a heat shield in place, and the run from the top of the aluminum fuel
line on the firewall, to the carburettor, is a steel-braid reinforced hose
with flexible heat-shield insulation over top.
Also, while I'm at it, I might as well mention that my wing-mounted fuel
pumps are installed as low as possible in the wing leading edges and push
fuel through the inline filters - as per Frank's recommendations.
The alu fuel lines each include a ShutOff valve (Transport Canada
regulations) just before the 'T' at the cockpit center/base of the wing
spar. They are normally left ON (i.e. 'both') for simplicity.
Fuel management is accomplished (as mentioned before) by running the 2
wing-mounted Facets fulltime except as required to balance a low tank. The
firewall pump runs all the time whenever the ignition power is ON
(electronic) - ( i.e. I can quickly turn off all 'normal' electrical power
in case of smoke/fire, and the engine keeps running. IF that doesn't stop
the problem, then the next step is "IGN switches OFF" and "Land Soon!" ;-)
The only improvement I'd like to make is to find a way to bring the handles
for the shutoff valves up from the floor to the sub-panel so they are more
visible and faster to reach in case of a forced landing. Anyone have any
good, simple solutions?
This was as safe and uncomplicated as I could make it given the fact that I
have two wing-mounted tanks, electronic ignition, and no engine-driven pump.
Also, my fuel controls and indicators are all grouped together on the
sub-panel in a schematic layout, including small lines (stripes) installed
to help me visualize fuel flow along the system.
fwiw
--
Grant Corriveau
C-GHTF / HDS / CAM100
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: | Re: Fuel System & ZAC |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mike" <wizard-24@juno.com>
"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."
I've read through probably about 100 posts on this subject. What I still don't
understand is why ZAC designs their fuel system for the 601XL with the pump(s)
mounted in the cockpit or on the firewall (either inside or out). William Wynne
does the same for his Corvair Conversion. In other words, ZAC does not show
the pumps mounted in the wing bays (and really -- there's probably not enough
room in the XL model, especially for those of us who built to plans and the
wings are already closed up). For a beginner like me, do I trust ZAC, or those
here on the list? And why aren't they both saying the same thing? Very confusing....
Mike Fortunato
601XL
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!
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: | Re: Fuel System & ZAC |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: N5SL <nfivesl@yahoo.com>
William advocates 100LL and I'm sure ZAC designs their installations for 100LL.
Personally, I'm installing pumps at the outlet of the tanks if I can squeeze
them in there.
Mike <wizard-24@juno.com> wrote:--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mike"
What I still don't understand is why ZAC designs their fuel system for the 601XL
with the pump(s) mounted in the cockpit or on the firewall (either inside or
out). William Wynne does the same for his Corvair Conversion.
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... (Now in the 801 and 701) |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com
In a message dated 1/27/2005 1:59:22 AM Central Standard Time,
Dabusmith@aol.com writes:
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
Great point Dave.
I have wondered what the low pressure air on top of the wing does to the fuel
tank pressure?
And to the gravity feed that we depend on? Works good on the ground, static
situation. And in flight, wing lift air flow? Prop induced air flow?
Question: Is the ram air tube some distance above the wing surface by design?
Or just eyeballed at about 1&1/2 inches or so? Does anyone know what the best
design is for a ram air cap?
Sealing off the caps built in vents, should eliminate the low pressure syphon
effect, if it exists at all. The ram air tube, size? Flare or no flair? Cut
at an angle to the air flow ???
Jerry
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com
Hello Thilo:
Thank you for clarifying the position of the sensor....my apologies for the
error.
Tracy
Do Not Archive
In a message dated 1/27/2005 9:52:07 AM Eastern Standard Time,
thilo.kind@gmx.net writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
Hi folks,
the oil temperature probe at the Rotax 912 is located near the oil pump
below the engine. The oil reservoir has no probe.
I see around 195 F for the oil in cruise and level. During take off and
climb the oil gets to 230F, so I assume I don't have an issue with water.
Best regards
Thilo Kind
----- Original Message -----
From: <Crvsecretary@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com
>
>
> Hello Thoby:
>
> I agree the oil must see 212 F, but the oil temp sender is located in the
> oil tank...the COOLEST temps the oil sees. I would think that oil sees
much
> higher temps than 212 travelling around the cylinder heads.
>
> I see the same thing happen in my Harley, and the HD doesn't even have an
> oil cooler.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> Tracy
> 601XL
> tail 85%
> do not archive
>
>
> In a message dated 1/27/2005 5:08:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> thobgret@wanadoo.fr writes:
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "thobgret" <thobgret@wanadoo.fr>
>
> Thilo,
>
> 200 F is rather low; to evaporate possibly accumulated condensation
water,
> at least every time you fly 212 F must be reached.
>
>
> Thoby Piek CH701 Rotax912 360H
> France
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thilo Kind" <thilo.kind@gmx.net>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re:Oil cooling
>
>
> > --> 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.
>
>
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Chuck Deiterich" <cfd@thegateway.net>
The following discussion is my impression, which could have been
influenced by my instructor (Cessna 150). In the landing pattern, the power
is reduced to about 1500 rpm. At approach speed and this rpm, the propeller
blades advance through the air without adding any thrust. At idle rpm the
air pushes against the propeller and adds drag. My impression is that the
slow turning propeller disc actually adds more drag than if it were not
turning at all. Also this disc blocks some of the airflow over the elevator.
If the above is correct, I would expect the L/D to be better with the
propeller stopped rather than at idle or wind milling. Also the elevator
would be more effective.
My question is: to find the best power-out glide L/D and associated
airspeed, and without shutting off the engine, can I set the engine rpm so
the propeller advances through the air at the same speed as the air going by
(somewhat simulating a stopped propeller)? (I can calculate this rpm using
the pitch of my propeller.)
Chuck D.
N701TX
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: | Re: Fuel System & ZAC |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "nhulin" <nhulin@hotmail.com>
On Thu Jan 27 at 10:36 AM, N5SL (nfivesl@yahoo.com) wrote:
<snip>
William advocates 100LL and I'm sure ZAC designs their installations for
100LL.
Personally, I'm installing pumps at the outlet of the tanks if I can squeeze
them in there.
Mike <wizard-24@juno.com> wrote:--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mike"
What I still don't understand is why ZAC designs their fuel system for the
601XL
with the pump(s) mounted in the cockpit or on the firewall (either inside or
out). William Wynne does the same for his Corvair Conversion.
<snip>
William's reasoning is that the typical AB light aircraft is going to be
flown less than 100 hours per year. If we assume that the difference between
100LL and mogas is around $1/gal and you use 6gph then the cost to run 100LL
is around $600 more than mogas. Given the fixed costs (maintenance,
insurance, tie down or hanger, charts, BFR, etc), and an assortment of other
costs that we all absorb in pursuit of our recreational flying (such as
autopilots, avionics upgrades, renting a car and staying in a hotel at our
destination, camping at OSH or Sun-n-Fun), then the $600/year is likely only
a small percentage of our total annual aircraft related expenses. The less
you fly the less financial difference it makes. If you lean correctly or
take a few extra minutes to make the journey (65% cruise rather than 70% or
75% cruise) you might get your fuel flow down to 4gph. Hey, you just saved
around $200/year.
The mogas vs 100LL debate in the realm of typical Zodiac builder is one of
saving a few dollars in fuel at whatever cost in fuel system complexity,
reliability, and expense. Keep It Simple Stupid comes to mind. I'll put my
dollars in the tank and run 100LL. The cost of doing otherwise might be too
great. As WW says "It isn't the probability of being right, it is the cost
of being wrong".
..neil
601XL/Corvair
Golf: All the frustration of building your own plane at a fraction of the
cost.
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: | 601XL flap torque tube long? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mark Stauffer" <mark.stauffer@cablespeed.com>
Fellow XL builders.
I was fitting the flap torque tube to the fuselage last night and found that
the whole assembly is too long (wider than the fuselage) by about 15 or so
mm. The problem seems to be that there are some burrs or welding
"residue/bumps" inside 6B19-3 Flap Control Arm where the arm was welded to
the tube. Both the left and right Flap Control Tubes fit into the Flap
Control Arm by about 1 1/8 inches.
Should I:
a. Work on filling down the "bumps"?
b. Cut the Right Flap Control Tube (the long one) down by 15mm or whatever
is necessary?
I can't see any reason why the two tubes should have to meet inside the Flap
Control Arm and I believe that 1 1/8" should be plenty of mating surface.
I'm leaning towards just cutting the tube instead of risking goofing up the
inside of the Control Arm. I guess I do need to watch the placement of the
control arm from left to right to make sure it lines up fairly close inline
with the flap motor arm. I may have to cut some from both Flap Control
Tubes.
Has anyone else had this problem? Am I missing something?
As always thanks for your help.
Mark Stauffer
601XL Working on fuselage
Odenton, MD
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Cdngoose" <601xl@sympatico.ca>
Gents www.ch601.org has a problem; I have run out of display planes for
the welcome page! IF you have a 601 picture or anyone's please send it
to me at cdngoose@osprey2.com
Mark Townsend
Alma, Ontario
Zodiac 601XL EJ 2.2L
Osprey 2 serial # 751
www.ch601.org
www.Osprey2.com
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: 601XL flap torque tube long? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bill Howerton" <Bill@Howerton.com>
I can only report my experiences, but mine was the correct width. I used
the "extra" inside the flap control tubes/flap control arm inside the
aircraft to adjust the length to the width of my fuselage. Now I will tell
you that I did have to polish the flap control tubes to get them inside the
control arm all the way - perhaps that's the issue.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Stauffer" <mark.stauffer@cablespeed.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: 601XL flap torque tube long?
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mark Stauffer"
> <mark.stauffer@cablespeed.com>
>
> Fellow XL builders.
>
> I was fitting the flap torque tube to the fuselage last night and found
> that
> the whole assembly is too long (wider than the fuselage) by about 15 or so
> mm. The problem seems to be that there are some burrs or welding
> "residue/bumps" inside 6B19-3 Flap Control Arm where the arm was welded to
> the tube. Both the left and right Flap Control Tubes fit into the Flap
> Control Arm by about 1 1/8 inches.
>
> Should I:
> a. Work on filling down the "bumps"?
> b. Cut the Right Flap Control Tube (the long one) down by 15mm or whatever
> is necessary?
>
> I can't see any reason why the two tubes should have to meet inside the
> Flap
> Control Arm and I believe that 1 1/8" should be plenty of mating surface.
> I'm leaning towards just cutting the tube instead of risking goofing up
> the
> inside of the Control Arm. I guess I do need to watch the placement of the
> control arm from left to right to make sure it lines up fairly close
> inline
> with the flap motor arm. I may have to cut some from both Flap Control
> Tubes.
>
> Has anyone else had this problem? Am I missing something?
>
> As always thanks for your help.
>
> Mark Stauffer
>
> 601XL Working on fuselage
> Odenton, MD
>
>
>
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: "Reposition able gear" Skyshop |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Skyshop <danny@skyshops.org>
Recent discussions about repositionable gear for the LSA - the FAA is
confused as usual and included bad wording with a little thought about
the reality of amphibs. After we personally talked to the FAA (the
head of the LSA department), they assured us this problem would be
resolved. The first step will be mandatory placard in cockpit "Gear is
not to be repositioned in flight". This is only for LSA pilots of
course. This means you can take off from land and land back on land or
take off from water with the gear retracted and land on water.
Additionally you can transition between water and land while taxiing. Am
I the only one that can't believe the absurdity? And then in the near
future the wording will be changed again to allow repositioning in the
air probably with a requirement of some sort of additional training,
maybe float plane ticket. I hope this clears up some of the confusion.
Danny / www.Skyshops.org
B Johnson wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" <bjohnson@satx.rr.com>
>
>Yep,
>You gotta fly from your airport to another airport that has a "boat ramp",
>taxi into the water, get out and retract the gear, then fly to the lake you
>wanted, then fly back to the lake where the boat ramp airport is, then get
>out and extend the gear, then taxi up the boat ramp, then take off to your
>home airport.
>
>In other words, unless you happen to keep your plane at a land airport with
>"boat ramp" access, or keep your plane in the water all the time, don't
>bother.
>
>It is my expectation that this will be changed at some point during the next
>couple years, and/or some manufacturer will somehow come up with floats that
>can be landed in the water with the wheels still sticking out (can't really
>imagine how though... maybe "really skinny rollerblade-type wheels?? >:) )
>
>Bruce (not yet a pilot, but extensively studied all this sport pilot stuff)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bryan Martin
>To: Zenith List
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: "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.
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: 601XL flap torque tube long? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "nhulin" <nhulin@hotmail.com>
On Thu Jan 27 at 3:09 PM, Mark Stauffer (mark.stauffer@cablespeed.com)
wrote:
<snip>
I was fitting the flap torque tube to the fuselage last night and found that
the whole assembly is too long (wider than the fuselage) by about 15 or so
mm. The problem seems to be that there are some burrs or welding
"residue/bumps" inside 6B19-3 Flap Control Arm where the arm was welded to
the tube.
<snip>
Mark,
Mine had welding dag (an Oz expression) on the inside of the control arm
tube. I got a half round file and removed it in short order. The tubes are
the correct length to almost butt together in the middle of the control arm.
Check the total length of the tubes against the width of the fuselage and
the dimensions on 6-B-19.
..neil
601XL/Corvair
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: 601XL flap torque tube long? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mike" <wizard-24@juno.com>
> The problem seems to be that there are some burrs or welding
> "residue/bumps" inside 6B19-3 Flap Control Arm
Mine was like that too. I had to file down the weld to get it to fit (doesn't take
much filing).
Mike Fortunato
601XL
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: ron dewees <rdewees@mindspring.com>
Hi Mark,
I was lucky enough to have Scott Laughlin post my FAA inspection
pictures and a 3 meg takeoff video of my 601HDS taildragger a couple of
weeks ago. The shots and video are on his web page, cookinwithgas.com.
I the link to the shots is: http://www.cooknwithgas.com/RonDeWees/Ron.html
You are welcome to any or all if useful for 601.org.
Ron DeWees
N601TD
Cdngoose wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Cdngoose" <601xl@sympatico.ca>
>
>Gents www.ch601.org has a problem; I have run out of display planes for
>the welcome page! IF you have a 601 picture or anyone's please send it
>to me at cdngoose@osprey2.com
>
>Mark Townsend
>Alma, Ontario
>Zodiac 601XL EJ 2.2L
>Osprey 2 serial # 751
>www.ch601.org
>www.Osprey2.com
>
>
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: | Re: Any Builders in Calgary? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave & Darlene" <dnimigon@telusplanet.net>
Hi Dave
So your back out in this country again.
Any chance your visiting your parents at the same time. We could do coffe at
the museum or something
Dave (Alberta)
DO NOT POST
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Barth" <davids601xl@yahoo.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: 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 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: | dent in skin repair? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Joe Nance <joe@cloudstreet.net>
Hello to those on this list. I am a new builder of a 701 and have now made my
first mistake! In wraping the stabalizer skin around the nose ribs I created
a small dent right at the tip of the rib. The dent is aprox. 3/4 inch long. It's
not too bad but I'd like to fix it better than I have. Does anyone have any
tips on pushing out small dents in the aluminum skin?
Thanks!
Joe Nance
joe@cloudstreet.net
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Howard Carter <howado@cwia.com>
Joe,
ZAC recommends using a large spoon to push them out.
Howard Carter
do not archive
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: dent in skin repair? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
I Believe this subject has come up before. Try the Matronics search engine
at the link at the bottom of this message. You might find some info.
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Joe Nance <joe@cloudstreet.net>
>
> Hello to those on this list. I am a new builder of a 701 and have now made my
> first mistake! In wraping the stabalizer skin around the nose ribs I created
> a small dent right at the tip of the rib. The dent is aprox. 3/4 inch long.
> It's not too bad but I'd like to fix it better than I have. Does anyone have
> any tips on pushing out small dents in the aluminum skin?
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
In Phase I testing.
do not archive.
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! --
|