---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 12/09/05: 58 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:49 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (brucelee@mn.rr.com) 2. 06:10 AM - De-Icing Fluids - Metal Airframe and Canopy (jim) 3. 06:18 AM - Re: De-Icing Fluids - Metal Airframe and Canopy (Crvsecretary@aol.com) 4. 06:29 AM - Re: de-ice (Zed Smith) 5. 06:29 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (jim) 6. 06:33 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Pete Krotje) 7. 06:42 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Steve Hulland) 8. 06:56 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (doug kandle) 9. 06:57 AM - Re: 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity.601XL Fuel Tank (Paul Tipton) 10. 08:03 AM - Re: Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (brucelee@mn.rr.com) 11. 08:04 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (brucelee@mn.rr.com) 12. 08:16 AM - Re: Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance. (Steve Hulland) 13. 08:25 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Paul Mulwitz) 14. 08:30 AM - Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin (Doug Sire) 15. 08:31 AM - Re: Hello from new CH-701 builder with questions (NYTerminat@aol.com) 16. 08:34 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (cgalley) 17. 09:30 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (cgalley) 18. 09:38 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Randy) 19. 10:16 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Frank Stutzman) 20. 10:38 AM - Re: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin (Randy Stout) 21. 11:49 AM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (brucelee@mn.rr.com) 22. 12:37 PM - New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) Seeking info (Condon, Philip M.) 23. 12:48 PM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Frank Stutzman) 24. 01:14 PM - Re: New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) Seeking info (jnbolding1) 25. 01:33 PM - New Airplane Subject (JAPhillipsGA@aol.com) 26. 01:38 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Crvsecretary@aol.com) 27. 01:58 PM - Re: New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) (Paul Mulwitz) 28. 02:00 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Robert St.Denis) 29. 02:16 PM - Re: 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity.601XL Fuel Tank (Bryan Martin) 30. 02:22 PM - Re: Hello from new CH-701 builder with questions (Bryan Martin) 31. 02:31 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (JOHN STARN) 32. 02:50 PM - Re: De-Icing Fluids - Metal Airframe and Canopy (Bryan Martin) 33. 03:07 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Paul Mulwitz) 34. 03:11 PM - Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Garrou, Douglas) 35. 03:36 PM - Re: Scary (bill naumuk) 36. 03:56 PM - Re: 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity.601XL Fuel Tank Capacity 601XL... (JAPhillipsGA@aol.com) 37. 03:56 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Robin Bellach) 38. 03:56 PM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Bryan Martin) 39. 03:57 PM - Re: New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) Seeking info (Zodie Rocket) 40. 04:22 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (JOHN STARN) 41. 04:39 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Crvsecretary@aol.com) 42. 04:42 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Zodie Rocket) 43. 05:12 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Larry McFarland) 44. 06:13 PM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Craig Payne) 45. 06:13 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Paul Mulwitz) 46. 06:23 PM - HD vs HDS (Randy Stout) 47. 06:24 PM - Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance (Craig Payne) 48. 06:34 PM - Re: De-Icing Fluids - Metal Airframe and Canopy (NYTerminat@aol.com) 49. 07:16 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Craig Payne) 50. 07:33 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Craig Payne) 51. 08:12 PM - Re: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin (Craig Payne) 52. 08:27 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Steve Hulland) 53. 09:28 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Craig Payne) 54. 09:41 PM - Re: Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance. (Craig Payne) 55. 09:45 PM - Re: New Airplane Subject (Steve Hulland) 56. 09:53 PM - Re: HD vs HDS (Mike Fothergill) 57. 10:10 PM - Where *is* Zenith building the Quick-build kits? (Craig Payne) 58. 11:35 PM - Re: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin (xl) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:49:31 AM PST US From: brucelee@mn.rr.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com Thanks for the responses guys, In the future, I'll keep my questions and responses less inflammatory. I'm just coming from the "certified" side of flying and I am still trying to figure out what I want to build and how to build it. What I would appreciate an answer to is why are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? I'm serious when I ask this- I'm not being sarcastic. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz > > Hi Bruce, > > I agree with you that this is an interesting thread. Alas, it is > also a bit frustrating for some of us, so give us a little slack. > > The Sonex is a very similar plane to the Zodiac. It is all metal, > uses a similar size engine, and has two seats. I believe it is a > lot > smaller in the cockpit area and generally a bit faster in cruise > speed. While the Sonex people claim it is LSA compatible, that is > a > subject that might not be agreed upon by the FAA or the insurance > companies. It meets the gross weight and stall speed limitations, > but the cruise speed may be a bit high. > > Fortunately for some of us, the cruise speed limit on LSA is very > vague. It includes qualifiers about "Maximum Continuous Power" > and > "Sea Level" which are difficult to nail down when we don't fly at > sea > level and nobody really knows what "Maximum Continuous Power" > really > means. I generally believe this is a non-issue for those of us > who > are flying under Sport Pilot restrictions due to lack of a medical > certificate. > The issue of maximum gross weight is a horse of a different > color. It is very clear what this means, and a plane must have > this > number specified before it can be issued an airworthiness > certificate. It is not something you can change from one flight > to > the next. If your plane has a maximum gross weight over 1320 > pounds > it clearly is not compliant with LSA and cannot be flown under > Sport > Pilot limitations. It is possible, and indeed common, for pilots > to > fly their planes loaded over gross weight occasionally. They > should > realize they are violating the limits placed on the plane and may > pay > the ultimate price for this violation. I would hope they consider > the actual weather conditions (particularly density altitude) and > their own pilot skills when flying with an overloaded plane. It > is > much more likely for a plane to stall under this condition and the > characteristics of both stalls and normal flight may be > considerably > different from the normal ones. > > Other LSA limits which may or may not be met with either a Sonex > or > Zodiac include fixed pitch or ground adjustable prop. If you > install > an in-flight adjustable or constant speed prop you are, once > again, > out of the realm of LSA. This doesn't mean you can't do it. It > just > means you need a private pilot certificate or better and a medical > certificate to fly the plane. > > I think I speak the thoughts of many listers when I suggest you > avoid > violating the rules of LSA and SP limitations if you want to fly > under the Sport Pilot rule. I think we are all a bit nervous > about > the new freedom it gives us (particularly those of us who can't > easily get a new medical certificate) and we don't want to wave > any > red flags in front of the FAA bull. > > If it is your desire to avoid the cost and effort of getting a > higher > level license than the Sport Pilot certificate, then I urge you to > reconsider your goals. I personally think the Sport Pilot > certificate is a nice starting place for a new pilot to get to fly > but I don't think it is a good ending place for him to stay. I > believe the more we know the more likely we will survive the > inevitable tense moments that come up from time to time while > flying. I personally think training is one of the things we > should > all continue to do throughout our flying careers. Even if we > don't > actually get additional ratings and certificates, I think it is > wise > to continue gaining skills like those needed by commercial pilots > and > instrument ratings just to have a high likelihood if survival as > general aviation pilots in the real world. > > After all of that, I wish you luck in your airplane building and > flying future. I also encourage you to consider anything and > discuss > anything, but expect harsh reactions if you seem to be planning on > intentionally violating the rules. We have a tradition of > following > the rules in the experimental airplane community, and most of us > don't take kindly to other people doing things we feel may > endanger > our own freedom to exercise our rights to build and fly our planes. > > Paul > XL wings > > > At 04:54 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" > > > >I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the > subject! I do find > >it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up in hurry > though.>Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is > talk about what I > >would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've reported > someone to the > >thought police is just a little extreme? Enough on that subject- > are any of > >you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as the cleanex? Does > anyone know what > >catagory it is regestered in? the engine weighs only 15lbs more > than a > >3300Jabaru, but if he twists it 3300RPM, he cruises about 185mph! > This in a > >aircraft that clearly qualifies for LSA if he just keeps the RPM > down! Now, > >I don't expect anyone to put in writing that they are wilfully > going to > >"break the rules" but do you really think nobody is going to push > that>throttle in just a little more? All I am interested in is a > dialog about the > >possibilities that are out there and how a person can create what > they want > >and what the ramafications of doing that are. Let's keep this > thread going- > >it's great!! > >Bruce > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Bryan Martin" > >To: "Zenith List" > >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > > > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin > > > > > > 1. I don't think you understand the LSA rules as well as you > think you do. > > > You can't legally switch an airplane from LSA compliant to non > compliant> > and > > > back, it must be built to the LSA limitations and remain in > compliance for > > > it's entire history to remain eligible for LSA status. It's > not like an > > > airplane that can be flown in the utility category at one > gross weight and > > > flown in the normal category at a higher gross weight. > > > > > > 2. You can't can't legally change engines in an amateur built > airplane> > after > > > certification without informing the FAA and putting the > airplane back into > > > phase I testing. I believe you have to test for an additional > 5 hours in > > > the > > > new configuration before you can return the plane to normal > flight status. > > > Failing to follow this rule will at the very least give your > insurance> > company a valid excuse not to pay your damage claim > in the event of an > > > incident. > > > > > > 3. since you would have to build this modified airplane from > scratch> > anyway, > > > why not just build an RV-7 from scratch? It wouldn't cost much > more.> > > > > > > > -- > > > Bryan Martin > > > N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. > > > do not archive. > > > > > > > > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > > >> > > >> First, I appreciate your response- it is helpful and > constructive. I > > >> was thinking of plans building a 601XL and subsituting thicker > > >> materials to increase the overall strength of the airframe. I was > > >> going to use a o-235 for certification purposes, then switch > to a o- > > >> 320/160hp after the fact( I meant Ex- homebuilt, sorry). > Maybe I > > >> should just skip it and go with a RV7A/io-390? My last plane > was a > > >> 180KT twin and you get used to traveling that speed. I'm just > trying> >> to figure out how to duplicate that as cheaply as possible. > > >> Bruce > > >> P.S. I've read all the LSA rules and regs and I understand > them. I'm > > >> trying to build a multipurpose aircraft that will qualify for > sport> >> pilot rules when you only have 10 gal of fuel on board > and redline the > > >> engine at an artificially low RPM and no luggage. Then when a > "reguar> >> pilot is in command, you fill up the tanks, throw the > overnight bags > > >> in the back, and twist the engine way past redline- say 2800 > RPM and > > >> cruise 165KTs. I think This will require a ground adjustable > prop.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------- > Paul Mulwitz > 32013 NE Dial Road > Camas, WA 98607 > --------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:10:18 AM PST US From: "jim" Subject: Zenith-List: De-Icing Fluids - Metal Airframe and Canopy --> Zenith-List message posted by: "jim" Winter has struck. I'm going to the airport tomorrow to prepare the aircraft for a 1-week school for an editor of Popular Mechanics. Does anybody know of an inexpensive commercially available (automotive store or Lowes/Home Depot/Wallmart) de-icer fluid which will not harm the paint or surface of a metal airplane like my CH-601XL. I will have the plastic canopy covered to protect it from this fluid. 2nd Question: Again what commercially available fluid can be used on a canopy to de-ice and clean it. After cleaning off the metal surfaces with the above fluid, I would then apply this 2nd fluid to the canopy to get snow and ice off. I plan to buy two insecticide pump sprayers to apply the above two fluids to the aircraft. Thanks, Jim Jim Pellien Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes www.MASPL.com 703-313-4818 jim@sportsplanes.com Sent via the WebMail system at mail.pellien.com ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:18:32 AM PST US From: Crvsecretary@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: De-Icing Fluids - Metal Airframe and Canopy --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com Best de-icer I know of is a heated hangar ! (Sorry Jim - I just couldn't resist ! ) Tracy Smith Naugatuck, CT 601xl N458XL (reserved) POSITIVELY do not archive In a message dated 12/9/2005 9:11:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, jim@pellien.com writes: --> Zenith-List message posted by: "jim" Winter has struck. I'm going to the airport tomorrow to prepare the aircraft for a 1-week school for an editor of Popular Mechanics. Does anybody know of an inexpensive commercially available (automotive store or Lowes/Home Depot/Wallmart) de-icer fluid which will not harm the paint or surface of a metal airplane like my CH-601XL. I will have the plastic canopy covered to protect it from this fluid. 2nd Question: Again what commercially available fluid can be used on a canopy to de-ice and clean it. After cleaning off the metal surfaces with the above fluid, I would then apply this 2nd fluid to the canopy to get snow and ice off. I plan to buy two insecticide pump sprayers to apply the above two fluids to the aircraft. Thanks, Jim Jim Pellien Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes www.MASPL.com 703-313-4818 jim@sportsplanes.com ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:29:14 AM PST US From: Zed Smith Subject: Zenith-List: re: de-ice --> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith try warm water zed/701/r912/90%/etc/do not archive ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:29:23 AM PST US From: "jim" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "jim" Bruce, These rules represent a very different way of doing business for the FAA. First, the licensing requirements have been halved for a sport pilot, meaning that it will cost half as much on average to get into the air as a pilot in command. If there were a rash of sport pilot accidents that were way above the average for the private pilot community, it may get their attention. The new SP authority should be cherished by those who exercise it. Some private pilots can no longer get their medicals and have not been allwed to fly anything but gliders and 103 ultralights for years. Now they can fly again in GA-like aircraft. This is extremely importan to them and they do will exercise this new-found ticket to flying in a very safe fashion and they hope that all SP's do the same and do not try to skirt the rules, as you have been suggesting be done. The new Light Sport Aircraft rule is also a new way of doing business for the FAA. In the past, the FAA specified how all aircraft had to be built, maintained and repaired. With the Light Sport Aircraft rule, they are now asking industry to certify that they have built their aircraft in accordance with a set of industry, not FAA, standards. This is a startling development for a conservative government entity. It has resulted in 22 NEW GA-like Special Light Sport Aircraft being certified within 9 months.. Previously new Part-23 Standard aircraft were certified by the FAA at a turtles pace....maybe 1 per year for the last 50 years. These two rules are a dramatic turnaround for the FAA. The FAA, which is generally risk-adverse, has taken what I think is a small risk with these two rules that. The FAA may think it is a moderate to large risk. I don't know. Everybody in aviation who uses these two rules to get airborne should be grateful for them and we need to keep safe and abide by the associated rules and regulations. If we blatantly abuse them, and accidents result, the FAA has the power to take them away and put us back into the Dark Agers of General Aviation. Jim Jim Pellien Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes www.MASPL.com 703-313-4818 jim@sportsplanes.com ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: brucelee@mn.rr.com >--> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > >Thanks for the responses guys, In the future, I'll keep my questions >and responses less inflammatory. I'm just coming from the "certified" >side of flying and I am still trying to figure out what I want to >build and how to build it. What I would appreciate an answer to is why >are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going >to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? I'm serious when I ask >this- I'm not being sarcastic. >Bruce > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Paul Mulwitz >Date: Thursday, December 8, 2005 9:26 pm >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz >> >> Hi Bruce, >> >> I agree with you that this is an interesting thread. Alas, it is >> also a bit frustrating for some of us, so give us a little slack. >> >> The Sonex is a very similar plane to the Zodiac. It is all metal, >> uses a similar size engine, and has two seats. I believe it is a >> lot >> smaller in the cockpit area and generally a bit faster in cruise >> speed. While the Sonex people claim it is LSA compatible, that is >> a >> subject that might not be agreed upon by the FAA or the insurance >> companies. It meets the gross weight and stall speed limitations, >> but the cruise speed may be a bit high. >> >> Fortunately for some of us, the cruise speed limit on LSA is very >> vague. It includes qualifiers about "Maximum Continuous Power" >> and >> "Sea Level" which are difficult to nail down when we don't fly at >> sea >> level and nobody really knows what "Maximum Continuous Power" >> really >> means. I generally believe this is a non-issue for those of us >> who >> are flying under Sport Pilot restrictions due to lack of a medical >> certificate. >> The issue of maximum gross weight is a horse of a different >> color. It is very clear what this means, and a plane must have >> this >> number specified before it can be issued an airworthiness >> certificate. It is not something you can change from one flight >> to >> the next. If your plane has a maximum gross weight over 1320 >> pounds >> it clearly is not compliant with LSA and cannot be flown under >> Sport >> Pilot limitations. It is possible, and indeed common, for pilots >> to >> fly their planes loaded over gross weight occasionally. They >> should >> realize they are violating the limits placed on the plane and may >> pay >> the ultimate price for this violation. I would hope they consider >> the actual weather conditions (particularly density altitude) and >> their own pilot skills when flying with an overloaded plane. It >> is >> much more likely for a plane to stall under this condition and the >> characteristics of both stalls and normal flight may be >> considerably >> different from the normal ones. >> >> Other LSA limits which may or may not be met with either a Sonex >> or >> Zodiac include fixed pitch or ground adjustable prop. If you >> install >> an in-flight adjustable or constant speed prop you are, once >> again, >> out of the realm of LSA. This doesn't mean you can't do it. It >> just >> means you need a private pilot certificate or better and a medical >> certificate to fly the plane. >> >> I think I speak the thoughts of many listers when I suggest you >> avoid >> violating the rules of LSA and SP limitations if you want to fly >> under the Sport Pilot rule. I think we are all a bit nervous >> about >> the new freedom it gives us (particularly those of us who can't >> easily get a new medical certificate) and we don't want to wave >> any >> red flags in front of the FAA bull. >> >> If it is your desire to avoid the cost and effort of getting a >> higher >> level license than the Sport Pilot certificate, then I urge you to >> reconsider your goals. I personally think the Sport Pilot >> certificate is a nice starting place for a new pilot to get to fly >> but I don't think it is a good ending place for him to stay. I >> believe the more we know the more likely we will survive the >> inevitable tense moments that come up from time to time while >> flying. I personally think training is one of the things we >> should >> all continue to do throughout our flying careers. Even if we >> don't >> actually get additional ratings and certificates, I think it is >> wise >> to continue gaining skills like those needed by commercial pilots >> and >> instrument ratings just to have a high likelihood if survival as >> general aviation pilots in the real world. >> >> After all of that, I wish you luck in your airplane building and >> flying future. I also encourage you to consider anything and >> discuss >> anything, but expect harsh reactions if you seem to be planning on >> intentionally violating the rules. We have a tradition of >> following >> the rules in the experimental airplane community, and most of us >> don't take kindly to other people doing things we feel may >> endanger >> our own freedom to exercise our rights to build and fly our planes. >> >> Paul >> XL wings >> >> >> At 04:54 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: >> >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" >> > >> >I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the >> subject! I do find >> >it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up in hurry >> though.>Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is >> talk about what I >> >would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've reported >> someone to the >> >thought police is just a little extreme? Enough on that subject- >> are any of >> >you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as the cleanex? Does >> anyone know what >> >catagory it is regestered in? the engine weighs only 15lbs more >> than a >> >3300Jabaru, but if he twists it 3300RPM, he cruises about 185mph! >> This in a >> >aircraft that clearly qualifies for LSA if he just keeps the RPM >> down! Now, >> >I don't expect anyone to put in writing that they are wilfully >> going to >> >"break the rules" but do you really think nobody is going to push >> that>throttle in just a little more? All I am interested in is a >> dialog about the >> >possibilities that are out there and how a person can create what >> they want >> >and what the ramafications of doing that are. Let's keep this >> thread going- >> >it's great!! >> >Bruce >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: "Bryan Martin" >> >To: "Zenith List" >> >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance >> > >> > >> > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin >> > > >> > > 1. I don't think you understand the LSA rules as well as you >> think you do. >> > > You can't legally switch an airplane from LSA compliant to non >> compliant> > and >> > > back, it must be built to the LSA limitations and remain in >> compliance for >> > > it's entire history to remain eligible for LSA status. It's >> not like an >> > > airplane that can be flown in the utility category at one >> gross weight and >> > > flown in the normal category at a higher gross weight. >> > > >> > > 2. You can't can't legally change engines in an amateur built >> airplane> > after >> > > certification without informing the FAA and putting the >> airplane back into >> > > phase I testing. I believe you have to test for an additional >> 5 hours in >> > > the >> > > new configuration before you can return the plane to normal >> flight status. >> > > Failing to follow this rule will at the very least give your >> insurance> > company a valid excuse not to pay your damage claim >> in the event of an >> > > incident. >> > > >> > > 3. since you would have to build this modified airplane from >> scratch> > anyway, >> > > why not just build an RV-7 from scratch? It wouldn't cost much >> more.> > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Bryan Martin >> > > N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. >> > > do not archive. >> > > >> > > >> > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com >> > >> >> > >> First, I appreciate your response- it is helpful and >> constructive. I >> > >> was thinking of plans building a 601XL and subsituting thicker >> > >> materials to increase the overall strength of the airframe. I >was >> > >> going to use a o-235 for certification purposes, then switch >> to a o- >> > >> 320/160hp after the fact( I meant Ex- homebuilt, sorry). >> Maybe I >> > >> should just skip it and go with a RV7A/io-390? My last plane >> was a >> > >> 180KT twin and you get used to traveling that speed. I'm just >> trying> >> to figure out how to duplicate that as cheaply as >possible. >> > >> Bruce >> > >> P.S. I've read all the LSA rules and regs and I understand >> them. I'm >> > >> trying to build a multipurpose aircraft that will qualify for >> sport> >> pilot rules when you only have 10 gal of fuel on board >> and redline the >> > >> engine at an artificially low RPM and no luggage. Then when a >> "reguar> >> pilot is in command, you fill up the tanks, throw the >> overnight bags >> > >> in the back, and twist the engine way past redline- say 2800 >> RPM and >> > >> cruise 165KTs. I think This will require a ground adjustable >> prop.> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------- >> Paul Mulwitz >> 32013 NE Dial Road >> Camas, WA 98607 >> --------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> >> > > Sent via the WebMail system at mail.pellien.com ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:33:56 AM PST US From: "Pete Krotje" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Pete Krotje" Bruce, You are seriously misrepresenting the Jabiru J250. In no configuration does the J250 have four seats and it cruises at 120 knots at Vh, the spec for maximum cruise for LSA. It does not cruise faster than 120 knots. The four seat versions (J450) have a cruise listed at 115 knots. If lightly loaded if may do 120 knots but no more if operated at the max continuous engine rpm of 2850. You also state that the Jabiru engine can cruise past the 2850 rpm mark (you can twist it past 3200 with out much worry). While a pilot can operate the engine at any rpm he feels like, don't expect longevity to be the same at 3200 rpm as it would be at 2850. Comtinental 0-200's turn at 3500 and up for racing applications but last only a few hundred hours at that speed. The engine was engineered to run at the speeds published in the Jabiru manual. If you want to re engineer the engine to do something else that is fine but don't represent it as a Jabiru approved operation. Pete Krotje Jabiru USA -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Lee Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" Yep, the sonex is that fast. At sea level, the cruise speed is 135mph. At 8000ft TAS is 170mph(normal max cruise)- they do not spec rpm(VNE is actually 197mph). Zenith claims 138mph cruise @ 2800 rpm- well below what the engine can comfortably cruise at- you can twist it past 3200 with out much worry. Yet both of these planes are "poster children" for LSA when they are both capable of much higher than legal speed by just pushing in the lever- what gives? All I can think of is everyone is relying on self control by the pilot- yea, right. Another example is the J250 by Jabaru aircraft company- when it's not LSA, it has four seats and goes a whole bunch faster than 138mph. Pull out two seats and limit the rpm and weight and viola! you have a LSA- am I the only person who notices this stuff? I don't think so. Why don't other people want to discuss this? Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > > > I didn't know the Sonex was that fast? What you can be fairly certain > is that the DAR probably does, in other words if he see what he thinks > is a fast airplane he is almost certainly going to be very interested > what exactly you have done to slow it down. > > I think the Rules state that the airplane has to have a maximum "design" > speed of 138mph (I'm by no means and expert on the LSA rules), so I > wonder what happens when you have a plane that is clearly designed to > go faster but has been modified to slow it down? > > It would be fun to see the look on a DAR's face as you stand next to a > turbine Lanceair 4P with your sport pilot certificate though..:) > > Frank > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Lee > To: zenith-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" > > I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the subject! I > do find it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up in > hurry though. > Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is talk about > what I would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've reported > someone to the thought police is just a little extreme? Enough on that > subject- are any of you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as the > cleanex? Does anyone know what catagory it is regestered in? the > engine weighs only 15lbs more than a 3300Jabaru, but if he twists it > 3300RPM, he cruises about 185mph! This in a aircraft that clearly > qualifies for LSA if he just keeps the RPM down! Now, I don't expect > anyone to put in writing that they are wilfully going to "break the > rules" but do you really think nobody is going to push that throttle > in just a little more? All I am interested in is a dialog about the > possibilities that are out there and how a person can create what they > want and what the ramafications of doing that are. Let's keep this thread going- it's great!! > Bruce > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 06:42:15 AM PST US From: Steve Hulland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: Steve Hulland Bruce, It is simple, the FAA is driven by money, ambivalence and security. User Fees will make general aviation like it is in the rest of the world - very limited and very hard for the average person to enjoy. Ambivalence by most of FAA (we are a pain in the ass) and the general public (there is no real need for this very small rich man's endevor) makes our continued existance ho humm. Security would like to close all airspace to GA, with the exception of those who can afford the excessive rules involved with using airspace. I am a controller and pilot and have been for more than 38 years. Semper Fi Steve Hulland CH701 DO NOT ARCHIVE On 12/9/05, brucelee@mn.rr.com wrote: > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > > Thanks for the responses guys, In the future, I'll keep my questions > and responses less inflammatory. I'm just coming from the "certified" > side of flying and I am still trying to figure out what I want to > build and how to build it. What I would appreciate an answer to is why > are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going > to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? I'm serious when I ask > this- I'm not being sarcastic. > Bruce > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Mulwitz > Date: Thursday, December 8, 2005 9:26 pm > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz > > > > Hi Bruce, > > > > I agree with you that this is an interesting thread. Alas, it is > > also a bit frustrating for some of us, so give us a little slack. > > > > The Sonex is a very similar plane to the Zodiac. It is all metal, > > uses a similar size engine, and has two seats. I believe it is a > > lot > > smaller in the cockpit area and generally a bit faster in cruise > > speed. While the Sonex people claim it is LSA compatible, that is > > a > > subject that might not be agreed upon by the FAA or the insurance > > companies. It meets the gross weight and stall speed limitations, > > but the cruise speed may be a bit high. > > > > Fortunately for some of us, the cruise speed limit on LSA is very > > vague. It includes qualifiers about "Maximum Continuous Power" > > and > > "Sea Level" which are difficult to nail down when we don't fly at > > sea > > level and nobody really knows what "Maximum Continuous Power" > > really > > means. I generally believe this is a non-issue for those of us > > who > > are flying under Sport Pilot restrictions due to lack of a medical > > certificate. > > The issue of maximum gross weight is a horse of a different > > color. It is very clear what this means, and a plane must have > > this > > number specified before it can be issued an airworthiness > > certificate. It is not something you can change from one flight > > to > > the next. If your plane has a maximum gross weight over 1320 > > pounds > > it clearly is not compliant with LSA and cannot be flown under > > Sport > > Pilot limitations. It is possible, and indeed common, for pilots > > to > > fly their planes loaded over gross weight occasionally. They > > should > > realize they are violating the limits placed on the plane and may > > pay > > the ultimate price for this violation. I would hope they consider > > the actual weather conditions (particularly density altitude) and > > their own pilot skills when flying with an overloaded plane. It > > is > > much more likely for a plane to stall under this condition and the > > characteristics of both stalls and normal flight may be > > considerably > > different from the normal ones. > > > > Other LSA limits which may or may not be met with either a Sonex > > or > > Zodiac include fixed pitch or ground adjustable prop. If you > > install > > an in-flight adjustable or constant speed prop you are, once > > again, > > out of the realm of LSA. This doesn't mean you can't do it. It > > just > > means you need a private pilot certificate or better and a medical > > certificate to fly the plane. > > > > I think I speak the thoughts of many listers when I suggest you > > avoid > > violating the rules of LSA and SP limitations if you want to fly > > under the Sport Pilot rule. I think we are all a bit nervous > > about > > the new freedom it gives us (particularly those of us who can't > > easily get a new medical certificate) and we don't want to wave > > any > > red flags in front of the FAA bull. > > > > If it is your desire to avoid the cost and effort of getting a > > higher > > level license than the Sport Pilot certificate, then I urge you to > > reconsider your goals. I personally think the Sport Pilot > > certificate is a nice starting place for a new pilot to get to fly > > but I don't think it is a good ending place for him to stay. I > > believe the more we know the more likely we will survive the > > inevitable tense moments that come up from time to time while > > flying. I personally think training is one of the things we > > should > > all continue to do throughout our flying careers. Even if we > > don't > > actually get additional ratings and certificates, I think it is > > wise > > to continue gaining skills like those needed by commercial pilots > > and > > instrument ratings just to have a high likelihood if survival as > > general aviation pilots in the real world. > > > > After all of that, I wish you luck in your airplane building and > > flying future. I also encourage you to consider anything and > > discuss > > anything, but expect harsh reactions if you seem to be planning on > > intentionally violating the rules. We have a tradition of > > following > > the rules in the experimental airplane community, and most of us > > don't take kindly to other people doing things we feel may > > endanger > > our own freedom to exercise our rights to build and fly our planes. > > > > Paul > > XL wings > > > > > > At 04:54 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: > > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" > > > > > >I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the > > subject! I do find > > >it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up in hurry > > though.>Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is > > talk about what I > > >would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've reported > > someone to the > > >thought police is just a little extreme? Enough on that subject- > > are any of > > >you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as the cleanex? Does > > anyone know what > > >catagory it is regestered in? the engine weighs only 15lbs more > > than a > > >3300Jabaru, but if he twists it 3300RPM, he cruises about 185mph! > > This in a > > >aircraft that clearly qualifies for LSA if he just keeps the RPM > > down! Now, > > >I don't expect anyone to put in writing that they are wilfully > > going to > > >"break the rules" but do you really think nobody is going to push > > that>throttle in just a little more? All I am interested in is a > > dialog about the > > >possibilities that are out there and how a person can create what > > they want > > >and what the ramafications of doing that are. Let's keep this > > thread going- > > >it's great!! > > >Bruce > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Bryan Martin" > > >To: "Zenith List" > > >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > > > > > > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin > > > > > > > > 1. I don't think you understand the LSA rules as well as you > > think you do. > > > > You can't legally switch an airplane from LSA compliant to non > > compliant> > and > > > > back, it must be built to the LSA limitations and remain in > > compliance for > > > > it's entire history to remain eligible for LSA status. It's > > not like an > > > > airplane that can be flown in the utility category at one > > gross weight and > > > > flown in the normal category at a higher gross weight. > > > > > > > > 2. You can't can't legally change engines in an amateur built > > airplane> > after > > > > certification without informing the FAA and putting the > > airplane back into > > > > phase I testing. I believe you have to test for an additional > > 5 hours in > > > > the > > > > new configuration before you can return the plane to normal > > flight status. > > > > Failing to follow this rule will at the very least give your > > insurance> > company a valid excuse not to pay your damage claim > > in the event of an > > > > incident. > > > > > > > > 3. since you would have to build this modified airplane from > > scratch> > anyway, > > > > why not just build an RV-7 from scratch? It wouldn't cost much > > more.> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Bryan Martin > > > > N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. > > > > do not archive. > > > > > > > > > > > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > > > >> > > > >> First, I appreciate your response- it is helpful and > > constructive. I > > > >> was thinking of plans building a 601XL and subsituting thicker > > > >> materials to increase the overall strength of the airframe. I > was > > > >> going to use a o-235 for certification purposes, then switch > > to a o- > > > >> 320/160hp after the fact( I meant Ex- homebuilt, sorry). > > Maybe I > > > >> should just skip it and go with a RV7A/io-390? My last plane > > was a > > > >> 180KT twin and you get used to traveling that speed. I'm just > > trying> >> to figure out how to duplicate that as cheaply as > possible. > > > >> Bruce > > > >> P.S. I've read all the LSA rules and regs and I understand > > them. I'm > > > >> trying to build a multipurpose aircraft that will qualify for > > sport> >> pilot rules when you only have 10 gal of fuel on board > > and redline the > > > >> engine at an artificially low RPM and no luggage. Then when a > > "reguar> >> pilot is in command, you fill up the tanks, throw the > > overnight bags > > > >> in the back, and twist the engine way past redline- say 2800 > > RPM and > > > >> cruise 165KTs. I think This will require a ground adjustable > > prop.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------- > > Paul Mulwitz > > 32013 NE Dial Road > > Camas, WA 98607 > > --------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 06:56:04 AM PST US From: doug kandle Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: doug kandle The Sport Pilot rules are a kind of power vacuum for the FAA. For a government agency (especially the FAA) to release control over something is counter to almost every law of human (and government) nature. When is the last time you saw the FAA reduce the control they had over some segment of aviation? Also, there is no DNS entry for either mn.rr.com nor www.mn.rr.com. Where is this address? At 05:48 AM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > > why >are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going >to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? >Bruce > > > > > > do not archive. > > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 06:57:13 AM PST US From: "Paul Tipton" Capacity 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity60 Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity.601XL Fuel Tank Capacity 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity60 --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Paul Tipton" The auto gas caused what ever it is made of to have many horizontal cracks. It looked like it was going to disintegrate. I was afraid it would come apart in my gas tank. I calibrated a wooden dowl rod instead. ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:03:21 AM PST US From: brucelee@mn.rr.com Subject: Re: RE: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com Hi Pete, I'm sorry for not being specifc enough with my statements and I want to say that none of what I've stated is approved by anyone or any company. I apoligize for not clarifying the remark about RPM, I guess I do'nt expect more than 800 to 1000 hours(about ten years the way I fly) from any engine. once again, I'm sorry if anyone thought I was stating things that may have been construed as being approved by anyone or any company. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: Pete Krotje Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Pete Krotje" > > Bruce, > > You are seriously misrepresenting the Jabiru J250. In no > configuration does > the J250 have four seats and it cruises at 120 knots at Vh, the > spec for > maximum cruise for LSA. It does not cruise faster than 120 knots. > The four > seat versions (J450) have a cruise listed at 115 knots. If > lightly loaded > if may do 120 knots but no more if operated at the max continuous > engine rpm > of 2850. > > You also state that the Jabiru engine can cruise past the 2850 rpm > mark (you > can twist it past 3200 with out much worry). While a pilot can > operate the > engine at any rpm he feels like, don't expect longevity to be the > same at > 3200 rpm as it would be at 2850. Comtinental 0-200's turn at 3500 > and up > for racing applications but last only a few hundred hours at that > speed.The engine was engineered to run at the speeds published in > the Jabiru > manual. If you want to re engineer the engine to do something > else that is > fine but don't represent it as a Jabiru approved operation. > > Pete Krotje > Jabiru USA > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Lee > To: zenith-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" > > Yep, the sonex is that fast. At sea level, the cruise speed is > 135mph. At > 8000ft TAS is 170mph(normal max cruise)- they do not spec rpm(VNE is > actually 197mph). Zenith claims 138mph cruise @ 2800 rpm- well > below what > the engine can comfortably cruise at- you can twist it past 3200 > with out > much worry. Yet both of these planes are "poster children" for LSA > when they > are both capable of much higher than legal speed by just pushing > in the > lever- what gives? All I can think of is everyone is relying on > self control > by the pilot- yea, right. Another example is the J250 by Jabaru > aircraftcompany- when it's not LSA, it has four seats and goes a > whole bunch faster > than 138mph. Pull out two seats and limit the rpm and weight and > viola! you > have a LSA- am I the only person who notices this stuff? I don't > think so. > Why don't other people want to discuss this? > Bruce > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > To: > Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George > (Corvallis)" > > > > > > I didn't know the Sonex was that fast? What you can be fairly > certain > > is that the DAR probably does, in other words if he see what he > thinks > > is a fast airplane he is almost certainly going to be very > interested > > what exactly you have done to slow it down. > > > > I think the Rules state that the airplane has to have a maximum > "design"> speed of 138mph (I'm by no means and expert on the LSA > rules), so I > > wonder what happens when you have a plane that is clearly > designed to > > go faster but has been modified to slow it down? > > > > It would be fun to see the look on a DAR's face as you stand > next to a > > turbine Lanceair 4P with your sport pilot certificate though..:) > > > > Frank > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com > > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Bruce Lee > > To: zenith-list@matronics.com > > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" > > > > I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the > subject! I > > do find it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up > in > > hurry though. > > Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is talk > about > > what I would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've > reported > > someone to the thought police is just a little extreme? Enough > on that > > subject- are any of you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as > the > > cleanex? Does anyone know what catagory it is regestered in? the > > engine weighs only 15lbs more than a 3300Jabaru, but if he > twists it > > 3300RPM, he cruises about 185mph! This in a aircraft that > clearly > > qualifies for LSA if he just keeps the RPM down! Now, I don't > expect > > anyone to put in writing that they are wilfully going to "break > the > > rules" but do you really think nobody is going to push that > throttle > > in just a little more? All I am interested in is a dialog about > the > > possibilities that are out there and how a person can create > what they > > want and what the ramafications of doing that are. Let's keep > this thread > going- it's great!! > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 08:04:27 AM PST US From: brucelee@mn.rr.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com Also, there is no DNS entry for either mn.rr.com nor www.mn.rr.com. Where is this address? This is a website owned and operated by time warner/ road runner web mail. I have no idea where their server is located. Bruce Lee ----- Original Message ----- From: doug kandle Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: doug kandle > > The Sport Pilot rules are a kind of power vacuum for the FAA. For > a > government agency (especially the FAA) to release control over > something is counter to almost every law of human (and government) > nature. When is the last time you saw the FAA reduce the control > they had over some segment of aviation? > > Also, there is no DNS entry for either mn.rr.com nor > www.mn.rr.com. Where is this address? > > At 05:48 AM 12/9/2005, you wrote: > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > > > > why > >are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going > >to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? > >Bruce > > > > > > > > > do not archive. > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:16:55 AM PST US From: Steve Hulland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance. --> Zenith-List message posted by: Steve Hulland Bruce, If you or any other pilot think the FAA cannot, will no or might not change the new Sport Aviation Pilot program or any other flying program, simply join AOPA, EAA or any other aviation organization to keep up to date about airspace issues. The most important issue facing all of us is the "Temporary Washington DC ADIZ" becoming permenant as proposed by the FAA. If it does many pilots in and around Washington DC, Baltimour/Washington Intl. Airport and Dullas Intl. Airport will find their ability to fly greatly deminised or entirely elimanated - it will affect a great number of Ultralights too. You simply will not be able to fly anymore. If the temporary ADIZ becomes permenant, those that want their own ADIZ will find it much easier to get one. Already, we find Chicago, Denver, New York, San Francisco and Franklin KY seeking airspace restriction to "protect thier city from terroists" - read an ADIZ. The 911 Commission recently released a report that chastizes the FAA and NORAD for not protecting airspace inside the United States from terrosist - their implication is that the only way to accompolish this is to establish many ADIZ's. Yes, those who do not become informed pilots (at any level) and who flaunt the rules that currently exist hurt everyone of us and jepordize our future freedom to fly. Each of us has the duty and responsibility to be professional, knowledgable and informed so that we do not violate those rules already in effect. Your proposal to make your Sport Aircraft capable of flying way outside the established boundries will hurt every one of us. Turn your energies towards saving what we have. Read my attached word document with good informatin about how to defeat the Washington DC ADIZ and prevent future restrictions on our freedom to fly - then get involved and write the FAA, Congress and if you live near enough, attempt to attend the January Public Meetings and express your feelings. Semper Fi, Steve Hulland CH 701 Amado, AZ *DO NOT ARCHIVE* ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 08:25:17 AM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz The FAA has a long history of arbitrary and obviously wrong decisions. They have the distinction of being the worst government agency to work for. They also have a long history of managing airspace and aviation in such a way that it is, by far, the safest form of transportation in this country. Believe me when I say you don't want to get into a personal fight with them. They fight dirty. do not archive Paul XL wings At 04:48 AM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > >Thanks for the responses guys, In the future, I'll keep my questions >and responses less inflammatory. I'm just coming from the "certified" >side of flying and I am still trying to figure out what I want to >build and how to build it. What I would appreciate an answer to is why >are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going >to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? I'm serious when I ask >this- I'm not being sarcastic. >Bruce > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Paul Mulwitz >Date: Thursday, December 8, 2005 9:26 pm >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz > > > > Hi Bruce, > > > > I agree with you that this is an interesting thread. Alas, it is > > also a bit frustrating for some of us, so give us a little slack. > > > > The Sonex is a very similar plane to the Zodiac. It is all metal, > > uses a similar size engine, and has two seats. I believe it is a > > lot > > smaller in the cockpit area and generally a bit faster in cruise > > speed. While the Sonex people claim it is LSA compatible, that is > > a > > subject that might not be agreed upon by the FAA or the insurance > > companies. It meets the gross weight and stall speed limitations, > > but the cruise speed may be a bit high. > > > > Fortunately for some of us, the cruise speed limit on LSA is very > > vague. It includes qualifiers about "Maximum Continuous Power" > > and > > "Sea Level" which are difficult to nail down when we don't fly at > > sea > > level and nobody really knows what "Maximum Continuous Power" > > really > > means. I generally believe this is a non-issue for those of us > > who > > are flying under Sport Pilot restrictions due to lack of a medical > > certificate. > > The issue of maximum gross weight is a horse of a different > > color. It is very clear what this means, and a plane must have > > this > > number specified before it can be issued an airworthiness > > certificate. It is not something you can change from one flight > > to > > the next. If your plane has a maximum gross weight over 1320 > > pounds > > it clearly is not compliant with LSA and cannot be flown under > > Sport > > Pilot limitations. It is possible, and indeed common, for pilots > > to > > fly their planes loaded over gross weight occasionally. They > > should > > realize they are violating the limits placed on the plane and may > > pay > > the ultimate price for this violation. I would hope they consider > > the actual weather conditions (particularly density altitude) and > > their own pilot skills when flying with an overloaded plane. It > > is > > much more likely for a plane to stall under this condition and the > > characteristics of both stalls and normal flight may be > > considerably > > different from the normal ones. > > > > Other LSA limits which may or may not be met with either a Sonex > > or > > Zodiac include fixed pitch or ground adjustable prop. If you > > install > > an in-flight adjustable or constant speed prop you are, once > > again, > > out of the realm of LSA. This doesn't mean you can't do it. It > > just > > means you need a private pilot certificate or better and a medical > > certificate to fly the plane. > > > > I think I speak the thoughts of many listers when I suggest you > > avoid > > violating the rules of LSA and SP limitations if you want to fly > > under the Sport Pilot rule. I think we are all a bit nervous > > about > > the new freedom it gives us (particularly those of us who can't > > easily get a new medical certificate) and we don't want to wave > > any > > red flags in front of the FAA bull. > > > > If it is your desire to avoid the cost and effort of getting a > > higher > > level license than the Sport Pilot certificate, then I urge you to > > reconsider your goals. I personally think the Sport Pilot > > certificate is a nice starting place for a new pilot to get to fly > > but I don't think it is a good ending place for him to stay. I > > believe the more we know the more likely we will survive the > > inevitable tense moments that come up from time to time while > > flying. I personally think training is one of the things we > > should > > all continue to do throughout our flying careers. Even if we > > don't > > actually get additional ratings and certificates, I think it is > > wise > > to continue gaining skills like those needed by commercial pilots > > and > > instrument ratings just to have a high likelihood if survival as > > general aviation pilots in the real world. > > > > After all of that, I wish you luck in your airplane building and > > flying future. I also encourage you to consider anything and > > discuss > > anything, but expect harsh reactions if you seem to be planning on > > intentionally violating the rules. We have a tradition of > > following > > the rules in the experimental airplane community, and most of us > > don't take kindly to other people doing things we feel may > > endanger > > our own freedom to exercise our rights to build and fly our planes. > > > > Paul > > XL wings > > > > > > At 04:54 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: > > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" > > > > > >I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the > > subject! I do find > > >it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up in hurry > > though.>Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is > > talk about what I > > >would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've reported > > someone to the > > >thought police is just a little extreme? Enough on that subject- > > are any of > > >you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as the cleanex? Does > > anyone know what > > >catagory it is regestered in? the engine weighs only 15lbs more > > than a > > >3300Jabaru, but if he twists it 3300RPM, he cruises about 185mph! > > This in a > > >aircraft that clearly qualifies for LSA if he just keeps the RPM > > down! Now, > > >I don't expect anyone to put in writing that they are wilfully > > going to > > >"break the rules" but do you really think nobody is going to push > > that>throttle in just a little more? All I am interested in is a > > dialog about the > > >possibilities that are out there and how a person can create what > > they want > > >and what the ramafications of doing that are. Let's keep this > > thread going- > > >it's great!! > > >Bruce > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Bryan Martin" > > >To: "Zenith List" > > >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > > > > > > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin > > > > > > > > 1. I don't think you understand the LSA rules as well as you > > think you do. > > > > You can't legally switch an airplane from LSA compliant to non > > compliant> > and > > > > back, it must be built to the LSA limitations and remain in > > compliance for > > > > it's entire history to remain eligible for LSA status. It's > > not like an > > > > airplane that can be flown in the utility category at one > > gross weight and > > > > flown in the normal category at a higher gross weight. > > > > > > > > 2. You can't can't legally change engines in an amateur built > > airplane> > after > > > > certification without informing the FAA and putting the > > airplane back into > > > > phase I testing. I believe you have to test for an additional > > 5 hours in > > > > the > > > > new configuration before you can return the plane to normal > > flight status. > > > > Failing to follow this rule will at the very least give your > > insurance> > company a valid excuse not to pay your damage claim > > in the event of an > > > > incident. > > > > > > > > 3. since you would have to build this modified airplane from > > scratch> > anyway, > > > > why not just build an RV-7 from scratch? It wouldn't cost much > > more.> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Bryan Martin > > > > N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. > > > > do not archive. > > > > > > > > > > > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > > > >> > > > >> First, I appreciate your response- it is helpful and > > constructive. I > > > >> was thinking of plans building a 601XL and subsituting thicker > > > >> materials to increase the overall strength of the airframe. I >was > > > >> going to use a o-235 for certification purposes, then switch > > to a o- > > > >> 320/160hp after the fact( I meant Ex- homebuilt, sorry). > > Maybe I > > > >> should just skip it and go with a RV7A/io-390? My last plane > > was a > > > >> 180KT twin and you get used to traveling that speed. I'm just > > trying> >> to figure out how to duplicate that as cheaply as >possible. > > > >> Bruce > > > >> P.S. I've read all the LSA rules and regs and I understand > > them. I'm > > > >> trying to build a multipurpose aircraft that will qualify for > > sport> >> pilot rules when you only have 10 gal of fuel on board > > and redline the > > > >> engine at an artificially low RPM and no luggage. Then when a > > "reguar> >> pilot is in command, you fill up the tanks, throw the > > overnight bags > > > >> in the back, and twist the engine way past redline- say 2800 > > RPM and > > > >> cruise 165KTs. I think This will require a ground adjustable > > prop.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------- > > Paul Mulwitz > > 32013 NE Dial Road > > Camas, WA 98607 > > --------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------- Paul Mulwitz 32013 NE Dial Road Camas, WA 98607 --------------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 08:30:23 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin From: "Doug Sire" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Doug Sire" After completing my rudder at the factory workshop in October, I took a demo ride with Nick in the factory 601XL. At times there was a very definite exhaust fume odor in the cabin (and I'm sure it had nothing to do with my earlier lunch at Porky's Smokehouse). Nick said that sometimes happened at lower airspeeds. Does anyone else experience this in a 601XL? Are there any ways to better seal the nosewheel steering rods where they go through the firewall? Doug Sire 601XL - Rudder done awaiting kit ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 08:31:31 AM PST US From: NYTerminat@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Hello from new CH-701 builder with questions --> Zenith-List message posted by: NYTerminat@aol.com Rory Welcome to the list and congratulations on the 701 purchase. TI am building the 701 as my 1st build and it has been a hoot. A couple of thoughts that I can offer are as follows: 1. Don't bother with the folding wing option, it's a waste. If you want mine I will sell at 1/2 price. After seeing it on another plane I felt it wasn't worth installing it. 2. Go with the Skyshops firewall forward package as they include more that Zenith. They include the heater option, the vernier throttle control is included, the Rotax heated airbox, control cable and carburetor drip trays are included along with some other little goodies that escape my mind right now. The cowl is much nicer looking and supposedly faster. I recommend not using the 1" heater hose from Skysops and go with the blue silicone hose from Zenith, it is much easier to bend without kinking. 3. The bubble doors are a matter of choice between Skyshops and Zenith. I went with Skyshops because I like the 1/2 bubble and the 1/2 aluminum. It works a lot better with my paint scheme. They also have two latching points where Zenith has one. I installed my own gas strut shocks to keep the door open, Skyshops offers them as an option. 4.Carb and cabin heat are off one muff that is included with the firewall forward package. 5. As far as assembly I found that the plans are the worse part of the kit. They start out really detailed on the rudder and get progressively worse from there. Also Skyshops documentation leaves a lot to be desired. They must figure that if you made it to the end of the project you should be an excellent plans reader and interpreter by then. Hardest part to me was the painting. Took a lot more time than I thought. 6. Zenith and Skyhop have been excellent to work with. I had some small issues with Skyshops but Danny and Zaneta have been a pleasure to work with and are very responsive. I recommend them. Hats off to Roger at Zenith for answering any questions and for recently allowing me to fly his plane to get ready for my first flight. THANKS ROGER! Good luck with your build. I have found the Guy's on the Zenith list have been very helpful to my project. I hope to have a first run up by Christmas. What a gift that will be. I received my kit in February 05 and have enjoyed every minute. Also you may want to consider the electric flap option from Skyshops. Bob Spudis CH-701/912S ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 08:34:41 AM PST US From: "cgalley" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "cgalley" It didn't work for me either . Neotrace couldn't find it BUT it is a roadrunner ISP. I believe that MN stands for Minnesota. Cy Galley - Webmaster www.qcbc.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "doug kandle" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: doug kandle > > The Sport Pilot rules are a kind of power vacuum for the FAA. For a > government agency (especially the FAA) to release control over > something is counter to almost every law of human (and government) > nature. When is the last time you saw the FAA reduce the control > they had over some segment of aviation? > > Also, there is no DNS entry for either mn.rr.com nor > www.mn.rr.com. Where is this address? > > At 05:48 AM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >>--> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com >> >> why >>are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going >>to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? >>Bruce >> >> >> > > > do not archive. >> >> > > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 09:30:20 AM PST US From: "cgalley" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "cgalley" You obviously have not tried to deal with FEMA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz > > > The FAA has a long history of arbitrary and obviously wrong > decisions. They have the distinction of being the worst government > agency to work for. They also have a long history of managing > airspace and aviation in such a way that it is, by far, the safest > form of transportation in this country. > > Believe me when I say you don't want to get into a personal fight > with them. They fight dirty. > > do not archive > Paul > XL wings > > At 04:48 AM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >>--> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com >> >>Thanks for the responses guys, In the future, I'll keep my questions >>and responses less inflammatory. I'm just coming from the "certified" >>side of flying and I am still trying to figure out what I want to >>build and how to build it. What I would appreciate an answer to is why >>are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going >>to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? I'm serious when I ask >>this- I'm not being sarcastic. >>Bruce >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: Paul Mulwitz >>Date: Thursday, December 8, 2005 9:26 pm >>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance >> >> > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz >> > >> > Hi Bruce, >> > >> > I agree with you that this is an interesting thread. Alas, it is >> > also a bit frustrating for some of us, so give us a little slack. >> > >> > The Sonex is a very similar plane to the Zodiac. It is all metal, >> > uses a similar size engine, and has two seats. I believe it is a >> > lot >> > smaller in the cockpit area and generally a bit faster in cruise >> > speed. While the Sonex people claim it is LSA compatible, that is >> > a >> > subject that might not be agreed upon by the FAA or the insurance >> > companies. It meets the gross weight and stall speed limitations, >> > but the cruise speed may be a bit high. >> > >> > Fortunately for some of us, the cruise speed limit on LSA is very >> > vague. It includes qualifiers about "Maximum Continuous Power" >> > and >> > "Sea Level" which are difficult to nail down when we don't fly at >> > sea >> > level and nobody really knows what "Maximum Continuous Power" >> > really >> > means. I generally believe this is a non-issue for those of us >> > who >> > are flying under Sport Pilot restrictions due to lack of a medical >> > certificate. >> > The issue of maximum gross weight is a horse of a different >> > color. It is very clear what this means, and a plane must have >> > this >> > number specified before it can be issued an airworthiness >> > certificate. It is not something you can change from one flight >> > to >> > the next. If your plane has a maximum gross weight over 1320 >> > pounds >> > it clearly is not compliant with LSA and cannot be flown under >> > Sport >> > Pilot limitations. It is possible, and indeed common, for pilots >> > to >> > fly their planes loaded over gross weight occasionally. They >> > should >> > realize they are violating the limits placed on the plane and may >> > pay >> > the ultimate price for this violation. I would hope they consider >> > the actual weather conditions (particularly density altitude) and >> > their own pilot skills when flying with an overloaded plane. It >> > is >> > much more likely for a plane to stall under this condition and the >> > characteristics of both stalls and normal flight may be >> > considerably >> > different from the normal ones. >> > >> > Other LSA limits which may or may not be met with either a Sonex >> > or >> > Zodiac include fixed pitch or ground adjustable prop. If you >> > install >> > an in-flight adjustable or constant speed prop you are, once >> > again, >> > out of the realm of LSA. This doesn't mean you can't do it. It >> > just >> > means you need a private pilot certificate or better and a medical >> > certificate to fly the plane. >> > >> > I think I speak the thoughts of many listers when I suggest you >> > avoid >> > violating the rules of LSA and SP limitations if you want to fly >> > under the Sport Pilot rule. I think we are all a bit nervous >> > about >> > the new freedom it gives us (particularly those of us who can't >> > easily get a new medical certificate) and we don't want to wave >> > any >> > red flags in front of the FAA bull. >> > >> > If it is your desire to avoid the cost and effort of getting a >> > higher >> > level license than the Sport Pilot certificate, then I urge you to >> > reconsider your goals. I personally think the Sport Pilot >> > certificate is a nice starting place for a new pilot to get to fly >> > but I don't think it is a good ending place for him to stay. I >> > believe the more we know the more likely we will survive the >> > inevitable tense moments that come up from time to time while >> > flying. I personally think training is one of the things we >> > should >> > all continue to do throughout our flying careers. Even if we >> > don't >> > actually get additional ratings and certificates, I think it is >> > wise >> > to continue gaining skills like those needed by commercial pilots >> > and >> > instrument ratings just to have a high likelihood if survival as >> > general aviation pilots in the real world. >> > >> > After all of that, I wish you luck in your airplane building and >> > flying future. I also encourage you to consider anything and >> > discuss >> > anything, but expect harsh reactions if you seem to be planning on >> > intentionally violating the rules. We have a tradition of >> > following >> > the rules in the experimental airplane community, and most of us >> > don't take kindly to other people doing things we feel may >> > endanger >> > our own freedom to exercise our rights to build and fly our planes. >> > >> > Paul >> > XL wings >> > >> > >> > At 04:54 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: >> > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" >> > > >> > >I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the >> > subject! I do find >> > >it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up in hurry >> > though.>Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is >> > talk about what I >> > >would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've reported >> > someone to the >> > >thought police is just a little extreme? Enough on that subject- >> > are any of >> > >you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as the cleanex? Does >> > anyone know what >> > >catagory it is regestered in? the engine weighs only 15lbs more >> > than a >> > >3300Jabaru, but if he twists it 3300RPM, he cruises about 185mph! >> > This in a >> > >aircraft that clearly qualifies for LSA if he just keeps the RPM >> > down! Now, >> > >I don't expect anyone to put in writing that they are wilfully >> > going to >> > >"break the rules" but do you really think nobody is going to push >> > that>throttle in just a little more? All I am interested in is a >> > dialog about the >> > >possibilities that are out there and how a person can create what >> > they want >> > >and what the ramafications of doing that are. Let's keep this >> > thread going- >> > >it's great!! >> > >Bruce >> > >----- Original Message ----- >> > >From: "Bryan Martin" >> > >To: "Zenith List" >> > >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance >> > > >> > > >> > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin >> > > > >> > > > 1. I don't think you understand the LSA rules as well as you >> > think you do. >> > > > You can't legally switch an airplane from LSA compliant to non >> > compliant> > and >> > > > back, it must be built to the LSA limitations and remain in >> > compliance for >> > > > it's entire history to remain eligible for LSA status. It's >> > not like an >> > > > airplane that can be flown in the utility category at one >> > gross weight and >> > > > flown in the normal category at a higher gross weight. >> > > > >> > > > 2. You can't can't legally change engines in an amateur built >> > airplane> > after >> > > > certification without informing the FAA and putting the >> > airplane back into >> > > > phase I testing. I believe you have to test for an additional >> > 5 hours in >> > > > the >> > > > new configuration before you can return the plane to normal >> > flight status. >> > > > Failing to follow this rule will at the very least give your >> > insurance> > company a valid excuse not to pay your damage claim >> > in the event of an >> > > > incident. >> > > > >> > > > 3. since you would have to build this modified airplane from >> > scratch> > anyway, >> > > > why not just build an RV-7 from scratch? It wouldn't cost much >> > more.> > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Bryan Martin >> > > > N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. >> > > > do not archive. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com >> > > >> >> > > >> First, I appreciate your response- it is helpful and >> > constructive. I >> > > >> was thinking of plans building a 601XL and subsituting thicker >> > > >> materials to increase the overall strength of the airframe. I >>was >> > > >> going to use a o-235 for certification purposes, then switch >> > to a o- >> > > >> 320/160hp after the fact( I meant Ex- homebuilt, sorry). >> > Maybe I >> > > >> should just skip it and go with a RV7A/io-390? My last plane >> > was a >> > > >> 180KT twin and you get used to traveling that speed. I'm just >> > trying> >> to figure out how to duplicate that as cheaply as >>possible. >> > > >> Bruce >> > > >> P.S. I've read all the LSA rules and regs and I understand >> > them. I'm >> > > >> trying to build a multipurpose aircraft that will qualify for >> > sport> >> pilot rules when you only have 10 gal of fuel on board >> > and redline the >> > > >> engine at an artificially low RPM and no luggage. Then when a >> > "reguar> >> pilot is in command, you fill up the tanks, throw the >> > overnight bags >> > > >> in the back, and twist the engine way past redline- say 2800 >> > RPM and >> > > >> cruise 165KTs. I think This will require a ground adjustable >> > prop.> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------- >> > Paul Mulwitz >> > 32013 NE Dial Road >> > Camas, WA 98607 >> > --------------------------------------------- >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > > --------------------------------------------- > Paul Mulwitz > 32013 NE Dial Road > Camas, WA 98607 > --------------------------------------------- > > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 09:38:22 AM PST US From: "Randy" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy" Bruce, I couldn't agree with you more. Some of these manufactures like playing with numbers. They want the best of both worlds, wanting to sell plans to the LSA group as well as those who register Experimental. A friend of mine, flew in a Sonex (with a Jab 3300) registered as Experimental and the way it was propped, they were flying 170 + mph. Yet, go to Sonex's website and they'll explain to you how a Sonex, with a 3300 engine, can qualify for Sport Pilot. Like I said, playing with the numbers. Randy do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Lee" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" > > Yep, the sonex is that fast. At sea level, the cruise speed is 135mph. At > 8000ft TAS is 170mph(normal max cruise)- they do not spec rpm(VNE is > actually 197mph). Zenith claims 138mph cruise @ 2800 rpm- well below what > the engine can comfortably cruise at- you can twist it past 3200 with out > much worry. Yet both of these planes are "poster children" for LSA when > they > are both capable of much higher than legal speed by just pushing in the > lever- what gives? All I can think of is everyone is relying on self > control > by the pilot- yea, right. Another example is the J250 by Jabaru aircraft > company- when it's not LSA, it has four seats and goes a whole bunch > faster > than 138mph. Pull out two seats and limit the rpm and weight and viola! > you > have a LSA- am I the only person who notices this stuff? I don't think so. > Why don't other people want to discuss this? > Bruce > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > To: > Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" >> >> >> I didn't know the Sonex was that fast? What you can be fairly certain is >> that the DAR probably does, in other words if he see what he thinks is a >> fast airplane he is almost certainly going to be very interested what >> exactly you have done to slow it down. >> >> I think the Rules state that the airplane has to have a maximum "design" >> speed of 138mph (I'm by no means and expert on the LSA rules), so I >> wonder what happens when you have a plane that is clearly designed to go >> faster but has been modified to slow it down? >> >> It would be fun to see the look on a DAR's face as you stand next to a >> turbine Lanceair 4P with your sport pilot certificate though..:) >> >> Frank >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Lee >> To: zenith-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance >> >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" >> >> I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the subject! I do >> find it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up in hurry >> though. >> Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is talk about what >> I would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've reported someone to >> the thought police is just a little extreme? Enough on that subject- are >> any of you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as the cleanex? Does >> anyone know what catagory it is regestered in? the engine weighs only >> 15lbs more than a 3300Jabaru, but if he twists it 3300RPM, he cruises >> about 185mph! This in a aircraft that clearly qualifies for LSA if he >> just keeps the RPM down! Now, I don't expect anyone to put in writing >> that they are wilfully going to "break the rules" but do you really >> think nobody is going to push that throttle in just a little more? All I >> am interested in is a dialog about the possibilities that are out there >> and how a person can create what they want and what the ramafications of >> doing that are. Let's keep this thread going- it's great!! >> Bruce >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 10:16:19 AM PST US From: Frank Stutzman Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: Frank Stutzman On Fri, 9 Dec 2005 brucelee@mn.rr.com wrote: > Also, there is no DNS entry for either mn.rr.com nor > www.mn.rr.com. Where is this address? Somebody doesn't know how to use the various DNS tools well: net-monitor:/home/frank # nslookup > set q=any > mn.rr.com Server: 192.168.1.10 Address: 192.168.1.10#53 Non-authoritative answer: mn.rr.com nameserver = dns-sec-01.rdc-kc.rr.com. mn.rr.com nameserver = dns-pri-01.rdc-kc.rr.com. mn.rr.com origin = dns-pri-01.rdc-kc.rr.com mail addr = rradm.mn.rr.com serial = 2005110901 refresh = 3600 retry = 900 expire = 864000 minimum = 10800 mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 hrndva-01.mgw.rr.com. mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 hrndva-02.mgw.rr.com. mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 orngca-01.mgw.rr.com. mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 orngca-02.mgw.rr.com. mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 clmboh-01.mgw.rr.com. mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 clmboh-02.mgw.rr.com. mn.rr.com text = "v=spf1 redirect=rdc-kc.rr.com" Authoritative answers can be found from: dns-sec-01.rdc-kc.rr.com internet address = 24.94.165.131 dns-pri-01.rdc-kc.rr.com internet address = 24.94.165.130 Looks like to me that mn.rr.com is a mail exchanger address. Nothing unusual or sinister about that. Still doesn't explain where physically this server lives, but DNS doesn't typically have that info. Now that I've allowed myself to be drawn in on this thread, I've just got to ask. There is/was a person over on the Bonanza owners list who went by the name of Bruce Lee. Used to own a Baron, but recently sold it. Felt that he could not afford to buy parts from Raytheon, but refused to entertain the thought that non-Raytheon parts could be used safely and legally. Are you the same person? Frank Stutzman Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl" Hood River, OR ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 10:38:59 AM PST US From: "Randy Stout" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Stout" I get that occasionally, usually when I level off from a climb rather quickly. Occasionally it will happen during heavy turbulence. Randy Stout n282rs"at"earthlink.net www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21 > [Original Message] > From: Doug Sire > To: > Date: 12/9/2005 10:29:31 AM > Subject: Zenith-List: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Doug Sire" > > After completing my rudder at the factory workshop in October, I took a > demo ride with Nick in the factory 601XL. At times there was a very > definite exhaust fume odor in the cabin (and I'm sure it had nothing to do > with my earlier lunch at Porky's Smokehouse). Nick said that sometimes > happened at lower airspeeds. Does anyone else experience this in a > 601XL? Are there any ways to better seal the nosewheel steering rods > where they go through the firewall? > > Doug Sire > 601XL - Rudder done awaiting kit ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 11:49:16 AM PST US From: brucelee@mn.rr.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com Hi Frank, Yea I'm the same guy that sold my beloved Baron. I don't want to start that huge discussion about parts- all I said was: you can't legally use parts that are not TSOd or STCd on a "certified" aircraft without exposing yourself to substanial liability. Let's move on, now I want to build an experimental aircraft- I just have to figure out which one. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Stutzman Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Frank Stutzman > > On Fri, 9 Dec 2005 brucelee@mn.rr.com wrote: > > > Also, there is no DNS entry for either mn.rr.com nor > > www.mn.rr.com. Where is this address? > > Somebody doesn't know how to use the various DNS tools well: > > net-monitor:/home/frank # nslookup > > set q=any > > mn.rr.com > Server: 192.168.1.10 > Address: 192.168.1.10#53 > > Non-authoritative answer: > mn.rr.com nameserver = dns-sec-01.rdc-kc.rr.com. > mn.rr.com nameserver = dns-pri-01.rdc-kc.rr.com. > mn.rr.com > origin = dns-pri-01.rdc-kc.rr.com > mail addr = rradm.mn.rr.com > serial = 2005110901 > refresh = 3600 > retry = 900 > expire = 864000 > minimum = 10800 > mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 hrndva-01.mgw.rr.com. > mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 hrndva-02.mgw.rr.com. > mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 orngca-01.mgw.rr.com. > mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 orngca-02.mgw.rr.com. > mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 clmboh-01.mgw.rr.com. > mn.rr.com mail exchanger = 10 clmboh-02.mgw.rr.com. > mn.rr.com text = "v=spf1 redirect=rdc-kc.rr.com" > > Authoritative answers can be found from: > dns-sec-01.rdc-kc.rr.com internet address = 24.94.165.131 > dns-pri-01.rdc-kc.rr.com internet address = 24.94.165.130 > > > Looks like to me that mn.rr.com is a mail exchanger address. Nothing > unusual or sinister about that. Still doesn't explain where > physicallythis server lives, but DNS doesn't typically have that info. > > > Now that I've allowed myself to be drawn in on this thread, I've > just got > to ask. There is/was a person over on the Bonanza owners list who > wentby the name of Bruce Lee. Used to own a Baron, but recently > sold it. > Felt that he could not afford to buy parts from Raytheon, but > refused to > entertain the thought that non-Raytheon parts could be used safely and > legally. Are you the same person? > > Frank Stutzman > Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl" > Hood River, OR > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 12:37:44 PM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) Seeking info From: "Condon, Philip M." --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Condon, Philip M." Does anyone have any information on Chris Heinz updated 701 project with a continental 0-200 ? I read in a magazine the is working on it but I have not been able to get any data on it. Knowing the new designation 7xx would help me search..........Nothing on the zenith website. ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 12:48:46 PM PST US From: Frank Stutzman Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: Frank Stutzman On Fri, 9 Dec 2005 brucelee@mn.rr.com wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > > Hi Frank, Yea I'm the same guy that sold my beloved Baron. I don't > want to start that huge discussion about parts- all I said was: you > can't legally use parts that are not TSOd or STCd on a "certified" > aircraft without exposing yourself to substanial liability. And thats a valid opinon and I've no complaints with it (I may not completely agree, but that besides the point). What I find interesting is that you stick religiously to the rules with certified aircraft, but then want to push boundries of the LSA rules. > Let's move on, now I want to build an experimental aircraft- I just have to > figure out which one. Ageed. That's why I'm here, although in my case I'm keeping the Bonanza as long as I can. Frank Stutzman Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl" Hood River, OR ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 01:14:40 PM PST US From: "jnbolding1" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) Seeking info --> Zenith-List message posted by: "jnbolding1" >Does anyone have any information on Chris Heinz updated 701 project >with a continental 0-200 ? I read in a magazine the is working on it >but I have not been able to get any data on it. Knowing the new >designation 7xx would help me search..........Nothing on the zenith >website. 750 is the extent of my knowledge LOW&SLOW John ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 01:33:05 PM PST US From: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com Subject: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled rivets, bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best regards, Bill ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 01:38:54 PM PST US From: Crvsecretary@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why not go with proven concepts and a proven market? I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the RV-12 is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and others will definitely catch a cold. Any thoughts, friends? Tracy Smith Naugatuck, CT 601xl N458XL (reserved) do not archive In a message dated 12/9/2005 4:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, JAPhillipsGA@aol.com writes: --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled rivets, bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best regards, Bill ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 01:58:27 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Seeking info Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) Seeking info --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz Seeking info This sounds like the story I heard that Heintz is designing a new high wing plane for mass production, but not for kit or plans builders. Perhaps this is the same plane? Paul XL wings do not archive At 12:36 PM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Condon, Philip M." > >Does anyone have any information on Chris Heinz updated 701 project >with a continental 0-200 ? I read in a magazine the is working on it >but I have not been able to get any data on it. Knowing the new >designation 7xx would help me search..........Nothing on the zenith >website. > > --------------------------------------------- Paul Mulwitz 32013 NE Dial Road Camas, WA 98607 --------------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 02:00:49 PM PST US From: "Robert St.Denis" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: It was a toss up for me ... 3000hrs of banging rivets mind (time aside) was customer service. I showed up at the Midland plant and Matt spent near an hr with me and my brother going over all sorts of questions I had and showing us around. Vans never returned any emails I sent, and their phone person was less than up to speed on the 10, not to mention not too willing to help me out (more like trying to clear the line) [...] Content analysis details: (-4.4 points, 5.0 required) -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robert St.Denis" It was a toss up for me ... 3000hrs of banging rivets for an rv10 or 1/2 that for the 640 ... biggest thing that changed my mind (time aside) was customer service. I showed up at the Midland plant and Matt spent near an hr with me and my brother going over all sorts of questions I had and showing us around. Vans never returned any emails I sent, and their phone person was less than up to speed on the 10, not to mention not too willing to help me out (more like trying to clear the line) Thats something that you can't replace with a name nor a new design. Rob Crvsecretary@aol.com wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com > > > No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! > > Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why not > go with proven concepts and a proven market? > > I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the RV-12 > is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and others will > definitely catch a cold. > > Any thoughts, friends? > > > Tracy Smith > Naugatuck, CT > 601xl N458XL (reserved) > do not archive > > > In a message dated 12/9/2005 4:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, > JAPhillipsGA@aol.com writes: > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com > > Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept > plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled > rivets, > bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best > regards, Bill > > > ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 02:16:22 PM PST US Capacity 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity60 Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity.601XL Fuel Tank Capacity 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity60 From: Bryan Martin --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin I had the same thing happen to my universal Fuel Hawk tester. I also use auto gas in my Zodiac. I can't imagine why auto gas would cause the cracks in the tester, there's not that much difference between auto gas and avgas. I always test for alcohol before I fill the tank and never put alcohol tainted fuel in the airplane. Other than the cracks, there was no sign of damage to the tester. -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. do not archive. on 12/9/05 9:56 AM, Paul Tipton at PTIPTON@swmail.sw.org wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Paul Tipton" > > The auto gas caused what ever it is made of to have many horizontal > cracks. It looked like it was going to disintegrate. I was afraid it > would come apart in my gas tank. I calibrated a wooden dowl rod > instead. > ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 02:22:57 PM PST US Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Hello from new CH-701 builder with questions From: Bryan Martin --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin I have returned some unused parts to Zenith and had no trouble with them refunding the purchase price. Give them a call or e-mail and see what they have to say. -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. do not archive. on 12/9/05 2:26 AM, Rory Davis at n7cr@bellsouth.net wrote: > > Now for the questions: > > Firewall forward. Is the Skyshops fwf really that much faster than the ZAC > supplied fwf? Stupid me, should have waited, didn't discover the availability > of > the Skyshops fwf until too late... Does anybody know if ZAC will accept a > return > of the parts that won't be needed? From the pics, the Skyshops cowl has a much > better fit and finish than the ZAC cowl. If it's too big of a deal to return > the pieces suppose could sell the ZAC cowl to a scratch builder and buy the > retrofit kit. > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 02:31:07 PM PST US From: "JOHN STARN" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "JOHN STARN" AND the -12 has the cockpit seating forward of the main spar and a "flying" one piece horizontal stabilizer (like the F-86 Saber). More "normal" leg position than the 601XL Went by Vans about a month ago, -12 is 1 1/2 to Two years down the road. KABONG ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject > --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com > > Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept > plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled > rivets, > bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best > regards, Bill > > > ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 02:50:08 PM PST US Subject: Re: Zenith-List: De-Icing Fluids - Metal Airframe and Canopy From: Bryan Martin --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin The yellow automotive windshield de-icer might work for both applications. You should check to see if it is safe for acrylics. It should be, acrylics are used on cars as well as aircraft. -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. do not archive. on 12/9/05 9:08 AM, jim at jim@pellien.com wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "jim" > > Does anybody know of an inexpensive commercially available (automotive store > or Lowes/Home Depot/Wallmart) de-icer fluid which will not harm the paint or > surface of a metal airplane > like my CH-601XL. I will have the plastic canopy covered to protect it from > this fluid. > > 2nd Question: Again what commercially available fluid can be used on a canopy > to de-ice and clean it. After cleaning off the metal surfaces with the above > fluid, I would then apply this 2nd fluid to the canopy to get snow and ice > off. > ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 03:07:37 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz I think there is room for both ZAC and Van's in America. It is a big place. I have not seen anything firm on the RV-12, but I was at the factory a few months ago and asked about it. The story I got was it will not be ready for at least a year or two, so I lost interest at that point. Now that I have learned a lot more about both ZAC and RV's, I am convinced there is a niche for both of them and not much problem with competition between them. ZAC offers a nice assortment of easy to build, inexpensive, rugged designs. This appeals to a great many amateur builders for all the good reasons mentioned above. The planes perform well, but are not designed to set any performance records. For someone who wants a good serviceable plane ZAC is a good place to shop. Van's also offers a nice assortment of planes. They are not particularly easy to build, and not particularly inexpensive. If you just use the numbers both companies publish it takes around three times as many hours to build an RV as a Zodiac. Considering it takes lots of folks many years to build a Zodiac that makes the RVs a really risky and long task. Still, lots of people manage to build RVs and fly them so it is possible. Van's aircraft performance is a notch or two above ZAC's planes. This puts them in a middle ground between the relatively gentle 601 and 701 and the really high performance available in Glassair, Lanceair, and all the other really quick planes. I guess there is enough market for Van's class of planes since the numbers show a lot of successful RVs around. Will the RV-12 put ZAC out of business? I think not. It is a new design with new technology for Van's. It will probably be a very nice plane after several years of teething. Unfortunately, by that time there will be dozens of planes with exactly the same performance already in place in the market. I have no doubt Van will sell some RV-12s, but I doubt the numbers will come near any of the S-LSA models already popular when the first RV-12 has its first test flight. do not archive Paul XL wings At 01:38 PM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com > > >No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! > >Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why not >go with proven concepts and a proven market? > >I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the RV-12 >is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and >others will >definitely catch a cold. > >Any thoughts, friends? > > >Tracy Smith >Naugatuck, CT >601xl N458XL (reserved) >do not archive > > >In a message dated 12/9/2005 4:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, >JAPhillipsGA@aol.com writes: > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com > >Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept >plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled >rivets, >bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best >regards, Bill > > --------------------------------------------- Paul Mulwitz 32013 NE Dial Road Camas, WA 98607 --------------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 03:11:51 PM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance From: "Garrou, Douglas" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Garrou, Douglas" To "push the VNE to 200" on a 601, any 601, I think you would need to remove the wings entirely. One way or the other, if you know what I mean. Don't know about the tail; come to think of it you may need to lose that as well. Anyway, once you remove the wings and tail, your FVNE (fuselage only never-exceed velocity) would probably go way over 200. You'd have a much smoother ride in turbulence, as well. And you wouldn't really need to worry about landing gear. With that kind of weight savings, you probably could squeeze in a few more golf clubs. I say go for it! Let us know how it turns out. Doug Garrou Project 801 www.garrou.com p.s. what an obvious troll! -----Original Message----- Time: 09:09:01 AM PST US From: brucelee@mn.rr.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com [snip] Second question- what would you need to do(airframe mods) to push the VNE to 200? ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 03:36:19 PM PST US From: "bill naumuk" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Scary --> Zenith-List message posted by: "bill naumuk" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Scary > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" > > Weird. The list server for this list doesn't pass on attachments and an > e-mail without an attachment can't convey a virus. That is not to say that > it can't contain a link to a web page which can infect your PC through > various flaws in web browsers. > > -- Craig Everyone- Although I didn't have time to look at more than a half-dozen messages today, there were no flags. As I said yesterday, I'd never seen this before. There may very well have been a corrupt link that was passed around between listers. Hope no one caught a cold. Bill do not archive > > ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 03:56:30 PM PST US From: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 601XL Fuel Tank Capacity.601XL Fuel Tank Capacity 601XL... --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com Bryan, some of us on the thread missed what you all are talking about. Is it a gas tank measuring device? What I did was ensure my XL's tanks were bone dry. Had the airport guy put in gas at 2 gallons at a time. Used paint stir sticks to measure how much each time and marked each. When full I did the other tank to confirm and transferred that to a single stick. Accurate to an oz. and was free at Home Depot. Best regards, Bill of Georgia ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 03:56:31 PM PST US From: "Robin Bellach" <601zv@ritternet.com> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robin Bellach" <601zv@ritternet.com> Perhaps ZAC is already on the skids. Lead times for kit deliveries steadily get longer, and as far as I can see, without commensurate increase in production. Isn't that one of the red flags that have typically been exhibited by past kit producers? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 3:38 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com > > > No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! > > Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why not > go with proven concepts and a proven market? > > I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the RV-12 > is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and others will > definitely catch a cold. > > Any thoughts, friends? > > > Tracy Smith > Naugatuck, CT > 601xl N458XL (reserved) > do not archive > > > In a message dated 12/9/2005 4:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, > JAPhillipsGA@aol.com writes: > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com > > Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept > plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled > rivets, > bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best > regards, Bill > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 03:56:31 PM PST US Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance From: Bryan Martin --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin The published Vne of the 601XL is 180 mph. By definition, that means that 180 mph is 90% of the maximum speed the airplane has been tested at. I can tell you from personal experience that the XL will fly at 200 mph without losing the wings. You have to put it into a fairly steep dive to do it. But it will do it. I wouldn't recommend it on a routine basis though. -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. do not archive. on 12/9/05 6:11 PM, Garrou, Douglas at dgarrou@hunton.com wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Garrou, Douglas" > > To "push the VNE to 200" on a 601, any 601, I think you would need to remove > the wings entirely. > > One way or the other, if you know what I mean. > > Don't know about the tail; come to think of it you may need to lose that as > well. ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 03:57:54 PM PST US From: "Zodie Rocket" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) Seeking info --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Zodie Rocket" http://www.zenithair.com/news/ch750.html Here is everything on the CH750. But I caution you to remember the Gemini!! The information about the 750 leaked out prematurely, there was no prototype as it was only a design on paper. Of which Chris I bet has over a 100 of those. But the 750 was interesting and may someday see a prototype. No matter how you look at it waiting for a new plane to be released is like waiting for the better computer next year, you'll always be waiting and never be enjoying! (did I just say I enjoy computers? God Mark give your head a shake!) Mark Townsend Alma, Ontario Zodiac 601XL C-GOXL, CH701 just started www.ch601.org / www.ch701.com / www.Osprey2.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Condon, Philip M. Subject: Zenith-List: New Zenith 7xx (701 with C0ntinental 0-200) Seeking info --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Condon, Philip M." Does anyone have any information on Chris Heinz updated 701 project with a continental 0-200 ? I read in a magazine the is working on it but I have not been able to get any data on it. Knowing the new designation 7xx would help me search..........Nothing on the zenith website. -- 12/9/2005 -- 12/9/2005 ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 04:22:02 PM PST US From: "JOHN STARN" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "JOHN STARN" I few more factors on RV's Vs Zenith. I too have been thinking about RV-12 & 601XL, without cost estimates on the -12 I went to the RV-9A sheet at Vans web site. The 601XL reported total costs (their web site) to build come out about 38K (new stuff everywhere) and the -9A average was about 43K. All new stuff also 118HP -9A and 100HP XL. Flush head rivets takes a lot more time than the pulled type. -12 is "reportedly" going with thinner skins than the -9A and pulled rivets. Having built the most complex of the RV derivatives, an HRII Rocket, in 5 years (one year off for cancer surgery). With 90% done on a HRII, 601XL RV-9A or -12 the "minor" details add up another 90%. KABONG ---- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz > > > I think there is room for both ZAC and Van's in America. It is a big > place. > > I have not seen anything firm on the RV-12, but I was at the factory > a few months ago and asked about it. The story I got was it will not > be ready for at least a year or two, so I lost interest at that point. > > Now that I have learned a lot more about both ZAC and RV's, I am > convinced there is a niche for both of them and not much problem with > competition between them. > > ZAC offers a nice assortment of easy to build, inexpensive, rugged > designs. This appeals to a great many amateur builders for all the > good reasons mentioned above. The planes perform well, but are not > designed to set any performance records. For someone who wants a > good serviceable plane ZAC is a good place to shop. > > Van's also offers a nice assortment of planes. They are not > particularly easy to build, and not particularly inexpensive. If you ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 04:39:58 PM PST US From: Crvsecretary@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com You make many good points, Paul. Thank you. My concerns are mostly in the business side of the issue: - ZAC was late in providing pre-punched skins while Vans offeres match-hole assembly. Why is Vans so far ahead? Because they can! Computer controlled sheet-metal punching machines are VERY expensive and Vans has the volume to pull it off. Does ZAC? Remember, most of the parts made in Mexico (MO, that is) are hand-made just as all the scratch-builders out there would make them. ZAC just makes more of them. - Vans has a bigger operation all around: more kits flying out the back door, a bigger web presence, more units on the runway. - The Vans name has a certain 'cachet' about it. You say RV, folks nod. I say Zenith, folks give you a blank stare. Please don't misunderstand - I bought this 601 because I knew it was THE BEST for me; I would hate to see the market dilute from too many players. Just my $0.02. Tracy Smith Naugatuck, CT 601xl N458XL (reserved) do not archive In a message dated 12/9/2005 6:09:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net writes: --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz I think there is room for both ZAC and Van's in America. It is a big place. I have not seen anything firm on the RV-12, but I was at the factory a few months ago and asked about it. The story I got was it will not be ready for at least a year or two, so I lost interest at that point. Now that I have learned a lot more about both ZAC and RV's, I am convinced there is a niche for both of them and not much problem with competition between them. ZAC offers a nice assortment of easy to build, inexpensive, rugged designs. This appeals to a great many amateur builders for all the good reasons mentioned above. The planes perform well, but are not designed to set any performance records. For someone who wants a good serviceable plane ZAC is a good place to shop. Van's also offers a nice assortment of planes. They are not particularly easy to build, and not particularly inexpensive. If you just use the numbers both companies publish it takes around three times as many hours to build an RV as a Zodiac. Considering it takes lots of folks many years to build a Zodiac that makes the RVs a really risky and long task. Still, lots of people manage to build RVs and fly them so it is possible. Van's aircraft performance is a notch or two above ZAC's planes. This puts them in a middle ground between the relatively gentle 601 and 701 and the really high performance available in Glassair, Lanceair, and all the other really quick planes. I guess there is enough market for Van's class of planes since the numbers show a lot of successful RVs around. Will the RV-12 put ZAC out of business? I think not. It is a new design with new technology for Van's. It will probably be a very nice plane after several years of teething. Unfortunately, by that time there will be dozens of planes with exactly the same performance already in place in the market. I have no doubt Van will sell some RV-12s, but I doubt the numbers will come near any of the S-LSA models already popular when the first RV-12 has its first test flight. do not archive Paul XL wings At 01:38 PM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com > > >No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! > >Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why not >go with proven concepts and a proven market? > >I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the RV-12 >is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and >others will >definitely catch a cold. > >Any thoughts, friends? > > >Tracy Smith >Naugatuck, CT >601xl N458XL (reserved) >do not archive > ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 04:42:37 PM PST US From: "Zodie Rocket" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Zodie Rocket" This doesn't normally require a response but with kitfox and all, I wanted to add to it. With the introduction of the 601Xl Quick Build kit Zenith sales have soared to a level which is unheard of. The 3 containers of planes destined to the 3 new distributors were gone WAY ahead of schedule and even Zenair in Canada has been pressed into increased production along with the increase of production in offering a Quick Build Kit for the 801 and the CH640. So the question is really with the new Sport Pilot does ZAC increase facilities and staff to a point where kits can be manufactured quick enough and when the boom subsides lay off the extra staff? This hardly seems the Zenith way. So wait times have increased from the standard 12 weeks to 16 now, but in that so have the amount of kits flying out the doors, they have substantially increased. Also 3 New Zenith Distributors have appeared Flight crafters in Florida, Quality Sport planes in California and Can-Zac Aviation in Canada. So now with 3 new sales centers all of which offer builders assistance and rudder workshops, how busy do you think the factory has gotten! Zenith Aircraft Company is seeing a workload that is unheard of at present but they are still holding Rudder workshops and stopping to take the time to support there customers. Yes wait times have increased, but look at how many new names you are seeing on this E-Mail list alone. In order to catch up and maintain this type of production I imagine a doubling of staff and a doubling of facilities would be in order, but who knows if the sport pilot craze will maintain sales at it's present rates. I hope so, but a cautious approach is always prudent. Zenith / Zenair / Can-Zac Aviation / Flight Crafters Quality Sport Planes and AMD make a large family here to serve you, The red flags your looking for are not existent take a closer look, Were just very busy. Mark Townsend Can-Zac Aviation Ltd. president@can-zacaviation.com www.can-zacaviation.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Bellach Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robin Bellach" <601zv@ritternet.com> Perhaps ZAC is already on the skids. Lead times for kit deliveries steadily get longer, and as far as I can see, without commensurate increase in production. Isn't that one of the red flags that have typically been exhibited by past kit producers? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 3:38 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com > > > No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! > > Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why not > go with proven concepts and a proven market? > > I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the RV-12 > is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and others will > definitely catch a cold. > > Any thoughts, friends? > > > Tracy Smith > Naugatuck, CT > 601xl N458XL (reserved) > do not archive > > > In a message dated 12/9/2005 4:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, > JAPhillipsGA@aol.com writes: > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com > > Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept > plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled > rivets, > bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best > regards, Bill > > > > > > -- 12/9/2005 -- 12/9/2005 ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 05:12:09 PM PST US From: Larry McFarland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: Larry McFarland Robin, Zenith airplane production is a steady as it goes proposition. They don't continually put intense effort into increasing production when the market is hot or not. They run lean all the time to avoid carrying too much inventory, too much skilled labor and perhaps they are the turtle in the great race. While a few good companies are going bankrupt because they've over floated their investments or inventory of unsold aircraft, Zenith will not be one of those. It's the multi-million dollar tooling and holdings that make a company inflexible and tied into a necessary profit to stay afloat. Of the twenty new LSA aircraft companies marketing now, there will likely be only half a dozen that will be in the race by next Oshkosh. I'd put money on Zenith being there. I only see their waiting list getting longer. Larry McFarland - 601HDS Robin Bellach wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robin Bellach" <601zv@ritternet.com> > > Perhaps ZAC is already on the skids. Lead times for kit deliveries >steadily get longer, and as far as I can see, without commensurate increase >in production. Isn't that one of the red flags that have typically been >exhibited by past kit producers? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 3:38 PM > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com > > > > > > No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! > > > > Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why >not > > go with proven concepts and a proven market? > > > > I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the >RV-12 > > is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and >others will > > definitely catch a cold. > > > > Any thoughts, friends? > > > > > > Tracy Smith > > Naugatuck, CT > > 601xl N458XL (reserved) > > do not archive > > > > > > In a message dated 12/9/2005 4:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > JAPhillipsGA@aol.com writes: > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com > > > > Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 >concept > > plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with >pulled > > rivets, > > bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best > > regards, Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 06:13:02 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" Hey, wait "Bruce Lee" - you died in 1973 :0) -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of brucelee@mn.rr.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com Also, there is no DNS entry for either mn.rr.com nor www.mn.rr.com. Where is this address? This is a website owned and operated by time warner/ road runner web mail. I have no idea where their server is located. Bruce Lee ----- Original Message ----- From: doug kandle Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: doug kandle > > The Sport Pilot rules are a kind of power vacuum for the FAA. For a > government agency (especially the FAA) to release control over > something is counter to almost every law of human (and government) > nature. When is the last time you saw the FAA reduce the control they > had over some segment of aviation? > > Also, there is no DNS entry for either mn.rr.com nor www.mn.rr.com. > Where is this address? > > At 05:48 AM 12/9/2005, you wrote: > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com > > > > why > >are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going > >to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? > >Bruce > > > > > > > > > do not archive. > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 06:13:22 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz I don't know about the history of kit plane producers, but for most businesses the existence of a long order backlog implies a very healthy sales environment. It is when a company can't sell its products or make sufficient profits from the sales it does make that it must close the doors. On the capacity question at ZAC, I got a communication from them a couple of months ago indicating they are installing some new equipment with the hope of increasing their production capacity. Also, their introduction of the new quick build kits may have put a heavy load on their small factory. All of these things seem positive to me. I don't expect ZAC to go bankrupt any time soon. do not archive Paul XL wings At 03:56 PM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robin Bellach" <601zv@ritternet.com> > > Perhaps ZAC is already on the skids. Lead times for kit deliveries >steadily get longer, and as far as I can see, without commensurate increase >in production. Isn't that one of the red flags that have typically been >exhibited by past kit producers? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 3:38 PM > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com > > > > > > No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! > > > > Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why >not > > go with proven concepts and a proven market? > > > > I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the >RV-12 > > is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and >others will > > definitely catch a cold. > > > > Any thoughts, friends? > > > > > > Tracy Smith > > Naugatuck, CT > > 601xl N458XL (reserved) > > do not archive > > > > > > In a message dated 12/9/2005 4:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > JAPhillipsGA@aol.com writes: > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com > > > > Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 >concept > > plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with >pulled > > rivets, > > bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best > > regards, Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------- Paul Mulwitz 32013 NE Dial Road Camas, WA 98607 --------------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 06:23:21 PM PST US From: Randy Stout Subject: Zenith-List: HD vs HDS --> Zenith-List message posted by: Randy Stout I know a couple of you have considered changing your HD wings for HDS wings, or vice versa. Do any of you have enough time flying with each type to describe the differences? Did you loose/gain any climb, service ceiling, or any other kind of performance? Did it make any difference in the handling? I'm thinking about building a set of HDS wings to put on my HD. One of the things I'm hoping to improve is a smoother ride. Those HD wings have a tendancy to bounce me around pretty good on windy or hot days. I guess I need something to build again. Randy Stout n282rs@earthlink.net www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21 ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 06:24:15 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" Awe, heck - Try the Peace Corps, a little bit of the Third World right there in DC ;-) Craig Grenada, 1985-87 Swaziland, 1987-89 -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cgalley Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance --> Zenith-List message posted by: "cgalley" You obviously have not tried to deal with FEMA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz > > > The FAA has a long history of arbitrary and obviously wrong > decisions. They have the distinction of being the worst government > agency to work for. They also have a long history of managing > airspace and aviation in such a way that it is, by far, the safest > form of transportation in this country. > > Believe me when I say you don't want to get into a personal fight > with them. They fight dirty. > > do not archive > Paul > XL wings > > At 04:48 AM 12/9/2005, you wrote: >>--> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com >> >>Thanks for the responses guys, In the future, I'll keep my questions >>and responses less inflammatory. I'm just coming from the "certified" >>side of flying and I am still trying to figure out what I want to >>build and how to build it. What I would appreciate an answer to is why >>are so many people(not just here) so petrified that the FAA is going >>to "wake up" one day and cancel the SP rules? I'm serious when I ask >>this- I'm not being sarcastic. >>Bruce >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: Paul Mulwitz >>Date: Thursday, December 8, 2005 9:26 pm >>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance >> >> > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz >> > >> > Hi Bruce, >> > >> > I agree with you that this is an interesting thread. Alas, it is >> > also a bit frustrating for some of us, so give us a little slack. >> > >> > The Sonex is a very similar plane to the Zodiac. It is all metal, >> > uses a similar size engine, and has two seats. I believe it is a >> > lot >> > smaller in the cockpit area and generally a bit faster in cruise >> > speed. While the Sonex people claim it is LSA compatible, that is >> > a >> > subject that might not be agreed upon by the FAA or the insurance >> > companies. It meets the gross weight and stall speed limitations, >> > but the cruise speed may be a bit high. >> > >> > Fortunately for some of us, the cruise speed limit on LSA is very >> > vague. It includes qualifiers about "Maximum Continuous Power" >> > and >> > "Sea Level" which are difficult to nail down when we don't fly at >> > sea >> > level and nobody really knows what "Maximum Continuous Power" >> > really >> > means. I generally believe this is a non-issue for those of us >> > who >> > are flying under Sport Pilot restrictions due to lack of a medical >> > certificate. >> > The issue of maximum gross weight is a horse of a different >> > color. It is very clear what this means, and a plane must have >> > this >> > number specified before it can be issued an airworthiness >> > certificate. It is not something you can change from one flight >> > to >> > the next. If your plane has a maximum gross weight over 1320 >> > pounds >> > it clearly is not compliant with LSA and cannot be flown under >> > Sport >> > Pilot limitations. It is possible, and indeed common, for pilots >> > to >> > fly their planes loaded over gross weight occasionally. They >> > should >> > realize they are violating the limits placed on the plane and may >> > pay >> > the ultimate price for this violation. I would hope they consider >> > the actual weather conditions (particularly density altitude) and >> > their own pilot skills when flying with an overloaded plane. It >> > is >> > much more likely for a plane to stall under this condition and the >> > characteristics of both stalls and normal flight may be >> > considerably >> > different from the normal ones. >> > >> > Other LSA limits which may or may not be met with either a Sonex >> > or >> > Zodiac include fixed pitch or ground adjustable prop. If you >> > install >> > an in-flight adjustable or constant speed prop you are, once >> > again, >> > out of the realm of LSA. This doesn't mean you can't do it. It >> > just >> > means you need a private pilot certificate or better and a medical >> > certificate to fly the plane. >> > >> > I think I speak the thoughts of many listers when I suggest you >> > avoid >> > violating the rules of LSA and SP limitations if you want to fly >> > under the Sport Pilot rule. I think we are all a bit nervous >> > about >> > the new freedom it gives us (particularly those of us who can't >> > easily get a new medical certificate) and we don't want to wave >> > any >> > red flags in front of the FAA bull. >> > >> > If it is your desire to avoid the cost and effort of getting a >> > higher >> > level license than the Sport Pilot certificate, then I urge you to >> > reconsider your goals. I personally think the Sport Pilot >> > certificate is a nice starting place for a new pilot to get to fly >> > but I don't think it is a good ending place for him to stay. I >> > believe the more we know the more likely we will survive the >> > inevitable tense moments that come up from time to time while >> > flying. I personally think training is one of the things we >> > should >> > all continue to do throughout our flying careers. Even if we >> > don't >> > actually get additional ratings and certificates, I think it is >> > wise >> > to continue gaining skills like those needed by commercial pilots >> > and >> > instrument ratings just to have a high likelihood if survival as >> > general aviation pilots in the real world. >> > >> > After all of that, I wish you luck in your airplane building and >> > flying future. I also encourage you to consider anything and >> > discuss >> > anything, but expect harsh reactions if you seem to be planning on >> > intentionally violating the rules. We have a tradition of >> > following >> > the rules in the experimental airplane community, and most of us >> > don't take kindly to other people doing things we feel may >> > endanger >> > our own freedom to exercise our rights to build and fly our planes. >> > >> > Paul >> > XL wings >> > >> > >> > At 04:54 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: >> > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Lee" >> > > >> > >I appreciate all of the good input I have recieved on the >> > subject! I do find >> > >it interesting how some people here get pretty worked up in hurry >> > though.>Remember, I have not done anything yet- all I've done is >> > talk about what I >> > >would like to do. Don't you think claiming you've reported >> > someone to the >> > >thought police is just a little extreme? Enough on that subject- >> > are any of >> > >you guys fimiliar with the sonex known as the cleanex? Does >> > anyone know what >> > >catagory it is regestered in? the engine weighs only 15lbs more >> > than a >> > >3300Jabaru, but if he twists it 3300RPM, he cruises about 185mph! >> > This in a >> > >aircraft that clearly qualifies for LSA if he just keeps the RPM >> > down! Now, >> > >I don't expect anyone to put in writing that they are wilfully >> > going to >> > >"break the rules" but do you really think nobody is going to push >> > that>throttle in just a little more? All I am interested in is a >> > dialog about the >> > >possibilities that are out there and how a person can create what >> > they want >> > >and what the ramafications of doing that are. Let's keep this >> > thread going- >> > >it's great!! >> > >Bruce >> > >----- Original Message ----- >> > >From: "Bryan Martin" >> > >To: "Zenith List" >> > >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance >> > > >> > > >> > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin >> > > > >> > > > 1. I don't think you understand the LSA rules as well as you >> > think you do. >> > > > You can't legally switch an airplane from LSA compliant to non >> > compliant> > and >> > > > back, it must be built to the LSA limitations and remain in >> > compliance for >> > > > it's entire history to remain eligible for LSA status. It's >> > not like an >> > > > airplane that can be flown in the utility category at one >> > gross weight and >> > > > flown in the normal category at a higher gross weight. >> > > > >> > > > 2. You can't can't legally change engines in an amateur built >> > airplane> > after >> > > > certification without informing the FAA and putting the >> > airplane back into >> > > > phase I testing. I believe you have to test for an additional >> > 5 hours in >> > > > the >> > > > new configuration before you can return the plane to normal >> > flight status. >> > > > Failing to follow this rule will at the very least give your >> > insurance> > company a valid excuse not to pay your damage claim >> > in the event of an >> > > > incident. >> > > > >> > > > 3. since you would have to build this modified airplane from >> > scratch> > anyway, >> > > > why not just build an RV-7 from scratch? It wouldn't cost much >> > more.> > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Bryan Martin >> > > > N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. >> > > > do not archive. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: brucelee@mn.rr.com >> > > >> >> > > >> First, I appreciate your response- it is helpful and >> > constructive. I >> > > >> was thinking of plans building a 601XL and subsituting thicker >> > > >> materials to increase the overall strength of the airframe. I >>was >> > > >> going to use a o-235 for certification purposes, then switch >> > to a o- >> > > >> 320/160hp after the fact( I meant Ex- homebuilt, sorry). >> > Maybe I >> > > >> should just skip it and go with a RV7A/io-390? My last plane >> > was a >> > > >> 180KT twin and you get used to traveling that speed. I'm just >> > trying> >> to figure out how to duplicate that as cheaply as >>possible. >> > > >> Bruce >> > > >> P.S. I've read all the LSA rules and regs and I understand >> > them. I'm >> > > >> trying to build a multipurpose aircraft that will qualify for >> > sport> >> pilot rules when you only have 10 gal of fuel on board >> > and redline the >> > > >> engine at an artificially low RPM and no luggage. Then when a >> > "reguar> >> pilot is in command, you fill up the tanks, throw the >> > overnight bags >> > > >> in the back, and twist the engine way past redline- say 2800 >> > RPM and >> > > >> cruise 165KTs. I think This will require a ground adjustable >> > prop.> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------- >> > Paul Mulwitz >> > 32013 NE Dial Road >> > Camas, WA 98607 >> > --------------------------------------------- >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > > --------------------------------------------- > Paul Mulwitz > 32013 NE Dial Road > Camas, WA 98607 > --------------------------------------------- > > > ________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 06:34:39 PM PST US From: NYTerminat@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: De-Icing Fluids - Metal Airframe and Canopy --> Zenith-List message posted by: NYTerminat@aol.com Get a hanger and save yourself alot of trouble ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 07:16:43 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" But don't hold your breath waiting for the RV-12 to ship: "So, don't look for a new RV in the near future." I also suspect it will be a one-engine plane: "This is possible because of the light weight of the 100 hp Rotax 912S four-cylinder, four-stroke, water/air-cooled engine. Center of gravity considerations do require that the engine be mounted close to the firewall." If true then this will be in contrast with the 601 family which is flying with a variety of engines (like my beloved Corvair). And Zenith's new quick-build option matches Vans pre-drilled skins. But with blind rivets a Zenith QB kit should come together faster. Two differences may remain. What is the cost difference between a QB 601XL and an RV-12? And are the NC-drilled skins from Vans a better fit than Zeniths? (Quotes from http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-12int.htm) -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JAPhillipsGA@aol.com Subject: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled rivets, bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best regards, Bill ________________________________ Message 50 ____________________________________ Time: 07:33:33 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" If you take a close look at the photos of the QB kits being produced you will discover that they are being built in a nice big 2-story plant in Mexico (or some Spanish-speaking country) not Mexico, MO. And this to me is good news. There is no reason why this production can't be ramped up to higher numbers. How does the lead time on QB kits compare to the "traditional" kit? -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Bellach Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robin Bellach" <601zv@ritternet.com> Perhaps ZAC is already on the skids. Lead times for kit deliveries steadily get longer, and as far as I can see, without commensurate increase in production. Isn't that one of the red flags that have typically been exhibited by past kit producers? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 3:38 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com > > > No 'maybe' about it, Bill....Chris H DID get it right !! > > Sure, Vans was ready for something radical (for them, at least) so why not > go with proven concepts and a proven market? > > I am very concerned that ZAC will be able to hold thier own once the RV-12 > is released. Vans is the giant in this market and I think ZAC and others will > definitely catch a cold. > > Any thoughts, friends? > > > Tracy Smith > Naugatuck, CT > 601xl N458XL (reserved) > do not archive > > > In a message dated 12/9/2005 4:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, > JAPhillipsGA@aol.com writes: > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com > > Dear Thread Friends, have any of you XL guys looked at the RV-12 concept > plane that Van's is working on ? Looks just about like a XL with pulled > rivets, > bubble canopy and 912 mill. Maybe Chris H got it right with the XL. Best > regards, Bill > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 51 ____________________________________ Time: 08:12:13 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" Somewhere there is a picture of putting Honda (clutch, accelerator, brake?) rubber boots on the steering links. Does anyone remember where I saw it? :-) As a back-up I also have one of these CO detectors: http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/coguardian4.php -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doug Sire Subject: Zenith-List: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Doug Sire" After completing my rudder at the factory workshop in October, I took a demo ride with Nick in the factory 601XL. At times there was a very definite exhaust fume odor in the cabin (and I'm sure it had nothing to do with my earlier lunch at Porky's Smokehouse). Nick said that sometimes happened at lower airspeeds. Does anyone else experience this in a 601XL? Are there any ways to better seal the nosewheel steering rods where they go through the firewall? Doug Sire 601XL - Rudder done awaiting kit ________________________________ Message 52 ____________________________________ Time: 08:27:13 PM PST US From: Steve Hulland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: Steve Hulland Craig, I have looked at every single picture on Zenith's home page. A close look at all of the ones that show any type of building shows the hangar I was in at Mexico, MO. I do not think any of the QB kits or any part of thier airframes are built in the country of Mexico. If you think otherwise, why not write and ask Cris or any of the guys at Mexico Mo. where they are built. Sincerely, Steve Hulland CH 701 DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 53 ____________________________________ Time: 09:28:51 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" I've been to the plant too and toured all of it. I don't recall seeing a second story concrete floor: http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/gif/qbk-wing1.jpg Or this much open space: http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/bldrpics/4-fuse-construction1_small1.jpg http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/gif/qbk-fuse-jig1.jpg Or any signs in a foreign language (possibly Spanish): http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/gif/qbk-aileron-jig.jpg Look at the words on the white concrete behind the descending staircase. And the title of this one is "Pre-jigging airframe kits at the Czech Aircraft Works factory": http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/bldrpics/4-fuse-construction_small1.jpg So maybe the plant is in the Czech Republic and not Mexico (the country). If you took any pictures at the factory that show any of this send them to me. I can send you mine. Now I suppose they might have moved into a new building since December of last year. But I doubt it. As far as I know they are still in the building by the runway. Where was the building you visited? You seem to think I am denigrating Zenith in some way. If so you should reread my message. I don't particularly need to write to the factory folks. I've already met them and I have my plane. -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve Hulland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: Steve Hulland --> Craig, I have looked at every single picture on Zenith's home page. A close look at all of the ones that show any type of building shows the hangar I was in at Mexico, MO. I do not think any of the QB kits or any part of thier airframes are built in the country of Mexico. If you think otherwise, why not write and ask Cris or any of the guys at Mexico Mo. where they are built. Sincerely, Steve Hulland CH 701 DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 54 ____________________________________ Time: 09:41:45 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance. --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" >> Read my attached word document The e-mail list software strips attachments. -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve Hulland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Zenith 601XL Weight & Balance. --> Zenith-List message posted by: Steve Hulland --> Bruce, If you or any other pilot think the FAA cannot, will no or might not change the new Sport Aviation Pilot program or any other flying program, simply join AOPA, EAA or any other aviation organization to keep up to date about airspace issues. The most important issue facing all of us is the "Temporary Washington DC ADIZ" becoming permenant as proposed by the FAA. If it does many pilots in and around Washington DC, Baltimour/Washington Intl. Airport and Dullas Intl. Airport will find their ability to fly greatly deminised or entirely elimanated - it will affect a great number of Ultralights too. You simply will not be able to fly anymore. If the temporary ADIZ becomes permenant, those that want their own ADIZ will find it much easier to get one. Already, we find Chicago, Denver, New York, San Francisco and Franklin KY seeking airspace restriction to "protect thier city from terroists" - read an ADIZ. The 911 Commission recently released a report that chastizes the FAA and NORAD for not protecting airspace inside the United States from terrosist - their implication is that the only way to accompolish this is to establish many ADIZ's. Yes, those who do not become informed pilots (at any level) and who flaunt the rules that currently exist hurt everyone of us and jepordize our future freedom to fly. Each of us has the duty and responsibility to be professional, knowledgable and informed so that we do not violate those rules already in effect. Your proposal to make your Sport Aircraft capable of flying way outside the established boundries will hurt every one of us. Turn your energies towards saving what we have. Read my attached word document with good informatin about how to defeat the Washington DC ADIZ and prevent future restrictions on our freedom to fly - then get involved and write the FAA, Congress and if you live near enough, attempt to attend the January Public Meetings and express your feelings. Semper Fi, Steve Hulland CH 701 Amado, AZ *DO NOT ARCHIVE* ________________________________ Message 55 ____________________________________ Time: 09:45:45 PM PST US From: Steve Hulland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Airplane Subject --> Zenith-List message posted by: Steve Hulland Craig, I have never seen these pictures. No, it is not the Mexico Mo plant and the guys working on the airplane do not appear to be Americans. I suspect you may be correct, they appear Hispanic or perhaps it is of the Chez plant in euroup. Not sure such a clean plant can easily be had in Mexico, SA. Enjoyed, enjoy your airplane - I am enjoying mine. Semper Fi, Steve H. ________________________________ Message 56 ____________________________________ Time: 09:53:26 PM PST US From: Mike Fothergill Subject: Re: Zenith-List: HD vs HDS --> Zenith-List message posted by: Mike Fothergill Hi; I changed mine from HD to HDS some years ago. The plane flies just the same only faster. ie: more miles per gallon. Yes it is smoother in rough air Mike Ch-601HDS 1400+ hours UHS Spinners Randy Stout wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Randy Stout > > > I know a couple of you have considered changing your HD wings for HDS wings, or vice versa. Do any of you have enough time flying with each type to describe the differences? Did you loose/gain any climb, service ceiling, or any other kind of performance? Did it make any difference in the handling? I'm thinking about building a set of HDS wings to put on my HD. One of the things I'm hoping to improve is a smoother ride. Those HD wings have a tendancy to bounce me around pretty good on windy or hot days. I guess I need something to build again. > > Randy Stout > n282rs@earthlink.net > www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21 > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 57 ____________________________________ Time: 10:10:35 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Received-SPF: none (mgr1.xmission.com: 70.246.216.230 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of craigandjean.com) client-ip=70.246.216.230; envelope-from=craig@craigandjean.com; helo=TheTCCraig; Subject: Zenith-List: Where *is* Zenith building the Quick-build kits? --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" Actually I'm a little confused by the captions on Zenith's web site. On this page there are three "interesting" captions: http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/xl-qbk-photos1.html "Pre-jigging airframe kits at the Czech Aircraft Works factory." "Fuselage construction jig at the Aero Leaver factory" "Rotating Wing Construction Table at the Aero Leaver factory" The factory floor pictured in the "Czech Aircraft Works" photo doesn't look like the one in the other two photos. One thing is clear: with captions like these Zenith certainly isn't trying to hide anything. Maybe the QB kits are made at Aero Leaver while the complete LSA aircraft are built in the Czech Republic? Anyway I suspect backlogs for these two products may be shrinking in the near future. Has anyone compared delivery dates for the QB kit vs. the "traditional" kit lately? -- Craig ________________________________ Message 58 ____________________________________ Time: 11:35:35 PM PST US From: xl Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Exhaust fumes in 601 cabin --> Zenith-List message posted by: xl I have a CO monitor that shows me the ppm CO in the cockpit. Parked on the ground, I'm sitting in a cloud of exhaust. I see on the order of 20 - 30 ppm CO. Higher when I taxi behind the heavies at BFI. Not a concern. Some fire departments use 40 ppm CO as the threshold for using protective gear. As I reported before, on the list, the CO detector probably saved my life when the stock Jabiru muffler failed and I had ~500 ppm CO in the cockpit (with no noticable exhaust odor). (The replacement stock muffler failed too. I'm using homemade mufflers now. When the 2nd stock muffler failed I was about 50nm from homebase. I decided to return home instead of landing early because my CO detector showed that it was safe. It turns out that the muffler had not totally failed. It was on its way, but because I was sensitized to the slight change in exhaust tone I caught the 2nd failure before it became catastrophic - unlike the first failure.) In cruise the CO detector reads 0.0 ppm. In slow flight I do see CO readings of about 50 ppm. Apparently, in cruise the airflow blows the exhaust away. At about 40 mph slow flight it does not do as good a job. I think that a whiff of exhaust odor is to be expected. But use a CO detector. Joe E N633Z @ BFI CH601XL 282 hours (yesterday's flight was awesome!) Jabiru 3300, Sensenich 49x64 On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Doug Sire wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Doug Sire" > After completing my rudder at the factory workshop in October, I took a > demo ride with Nick in the factory 601XL. At times there was a very > definite exhaust fume odor in the cabin (and I'm sure it had nothing to do > with my earlier lunch at Porky's Smokehouse). Nick said that sometimes > happened at lower airspeeds. Does anyone else experience this in a > 601XL? Are there any ways to better seal the nosewheel steering rods > where they go through the firewall? > > Doug Sire > 601XL - Rudder done awaiting kit > do not archive >