---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 02/21/06: 31 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:46 AM - Prop Pitch (Jonathan Starke) 2. 05:53 AM - Re: prop pitch (Zed Smith) 3. 06:53 AM - Homebuilt aircraft financing (John Hines) 4. 07:18 AM - Re: Homebuilt aircraft financing (David X) 5. 10:04 AM - Aux fuel pump in 701 (george.mueller@aurora.org) 6. 10:17 AM - Re: Homebuilt aircraft financing (Mike) 7. 10:50 AM - Re: Aux fuel pump in 701 (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 8. 11:03 AM - Re: Aux fuel pump in 701 (Bryan Martin) 9. 11:03 AM - Re: Aux fuel pump in 701 (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 10. 11:58 AM - Re: Application for Airworthiness Certificate (Mike Sinclair) 11. 12:24 PM - 701 Top mount fuel sender instalation (JERICKSON03E@aol.com) 12. 12:24 PM - Re: Homebuilt aircraft financing (Phil Maxson) 13. 12:31 PM - Re: Aux fuel pump in 701 (LarryMcFarland) 14. 12:47 PM - Re: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight (JERICKSON03E@aol.com) 15. 01:33 PM - Re: 701 Top mount fuel sender instalation (Paul Mulwitz) 16. 01:41 PM - Re: Re: Crosswind - Vented Tanks? (N5SL) 17. 02:04 PM - Re: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight (Johann G.) 18. 02:17 PM - Re: Re: Crosswind - Vented Tanks? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 19. 02:31 PM - Re: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 20. 03:20 PM - Re: Application for Airworthiness Certificate (nyterminat@aol.com) 21. 03:47 PM - Any thoughts on the 701 on floats? (John Marzulli) 22. 04:39 PM - Re: 701 Top mount fuel sender instalation (JERICKSON03E@aol.com) 23. 05:27 PM - Re: Re: prop pitch (tach acuracy) (Gary Gower) 24. 05:27 PM - Re: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight (n801bh@netzero.com) 25. 07:30 PM - Re: Homebuilt aircraft financing (Terry Turnquist) 26. 07:51 PM - Re: Homebuilt aircraft financing (Jeff Davidson) 27. 08:09 PM - RE : Re: Homebuilt aircraft financing (Carlos Sa) 28. 08:12 PM - Re: wing attachment and control cables (T. Graziano) 29. 09:48 PM - Re: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight Altitude. (Gary Gower) 30. 09:55 PM - Re: Any thoughts on the 701 on floats? (Gary Gower) 31. 11:40 PM - Re: Any thoughts on the 701 on floats? (Chip W. Erwin) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:46:06 AM PST US From: "Jonathan Starke" Subject: Zenith-List: Prop Pitch --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jonathan Starke" Hi All wise ones.... Rotax 912S in a Zodiac XL with GSC 3 Blade Prop.... What prop pitch has everyone set? 18degrees seems to stick in my mind, but what has everyone else set the pitch at? Ran my engine on Sunday, and it is sweet, smoother than I thought it would be. Now to finish the upholstery, and go flying! Thnx Jonathan Starke ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 05:53:47 AM PST US From: Zed Smith Subject: Zenith-List: re: prop pitch --> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith Suggest you use whatever blade setting gives 5500 rpm max at wide open throttle, warm engine, etc, with the plane tied to an anchor. Be prepared for the brakes NOT to hold, tires to slide on grass, Murphy's Law mishaps. Others will have variations of this, but just don't exceed the 5800 mark on takeoff. Happy flying. do not archive Zed/701/R912/same 90+% ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:53:14 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Homebuilt aircraft financing From: "John Hines" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" Are any of you financing your Zenith Aircraft? If so, with who? Zenith has several links to financing companies on their web site. NAFCO: They want spotless credit and because of stuff that is over 5 years old won't help me. AirFleet Capital and Beacon Credit have a $25000 minimum loan amount. I was really looking to finance the airframe first and then move on to the firewall forward. RecreationalFinance.com: Says the website is under construction. First National Bank of Audrain County, Missouri: They only loan money to local residents. I called a few other aircraft financing companies I found on the web but they don't finance homebuilts. I'm almost done with my tail kit and I have realized that I can build it faster than I can afford to pay for it. Any advise??? John Hines www.johnsplane.com John Hines Manager Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. 901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200 Rogers, AR 72756 Tel: 479-878-2449 Mob: 479-366-4783 Fax: 479-631-6224 John.Hines@craftontull.com Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs of our clients and provide them with successful solutions. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:18:31 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Homebuilt aircraft financing From: "David X" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "David X" Try MBNA. If you're a member of AOPA, there are a few good articles about this topic on their website (members area). http://www.aopa.org There's also some non-member material here: http://www.aopa.org/info/certified/afp/ A lot of people go for the home equity loan as a way to finance their project. -------- Zodiac 601 XL - CZAW Built - Rotax 912S DO NOT ARCHIVE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=13778#13778 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 10:04:47 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Aux fuel pump in 701 From: george.mueller@aurora.org --> Zenith-List message posted by: george.mueller@aurora.org I am thinking about the fuel system in my 701 and am considering putting in a facet fuel pump as a booster pump The pump I am considering is an FP40105 which doesn't have a check valve and puts out 25 to 45 PSI (my understanding is the Rotax 912 can handle a max pressure of 58psi) This pump would be used to avoid vapor lock on take off and as an aux pump if the mechanical pump on the Rotax fails I would install the pump after the gascolator and after an in line fuel filter, basically next to the gascolator Are there any problems that anyone can see with such an installation? I am concerned with the greater likelihood of vapor lock with auto gas George ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 10:17:16 AM PST US From: Mike Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Homebuilt aircraft financing --> Zenith-List message posted by: Mike > Are any of you financing your Zenith Aircraft? Why not finance it yourself by buying component kits one section at a time, rather than the whole thing at once? You'll save on interest charges (even though shipping costs will be slightly higher). There's really not much sense in buying sections that you're not ready to build yet -- especially since you would be paying interest charges on everything while much of it sits in your garage untouched. Mike Fortunato 601XL do not archive --------------------------------- Brings words and photos together (easily) with ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 10:50:27 AM PST US Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Aux fuel pump in 701 From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" Facet fuel pumps are usually plunger types and really do not need a filter before the pump. Being completely anal about fuel system design (seen too many vapour lock occurances) I like to have NO possible restrictions between the tank and pump and put the pump at the tank. With a high wing plane you could also put it down low. I would install it before the gascolator (Gascolators have been known to leak air which could conceivably air lock your pump...Almost as bad a s VL). The gasolator works just fine on my 601 in this postion. The pump pressure sounds awfully high. The Stratus uses the same carbs as the Rotax and works perfectly well with a 40106 (40105 will show zero pressure at full throttle and a single pump operating...so go for the 106). I would be concerned about the high pressure pump overcoming the needle valves in the carbs. How will you plumb the electric pump relative to the engine (YUUCK!...I would delete the mechanical pump and run two electrics) pump?...Series or parallel? If in series are you sure there is not a failure mode in the mechancial pump where the electric pump will do you no good? Safer way is in parallel with a check valve around the mechanical pump. You will probably need a check valve around the electric pump with this installation too in case it fails ( unless the mechanical pump can easily suck thru the dead electric pump)...Assuming you mechanical pump won't vapour lock at the same time. In fairness, I have never heard of anyone having a problem with a Rotax mechanical pump even on low wing aircraft...As I said I am anal. Use 3/8ths lines between the tanks and inlets to the pump...1/4 on the pessure side is fine. Frank 601HDS 2* electric pumps (no mech pump) 400 hours RV7A injected 2* electric pumps (n mech pump)...Hope it works..:) -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of george.mueller@aurora.org Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 9:56 AM Subject: Zenith-List: Aux fuel pump in 701 --> Zenith-List message posted by: george.mueller@aurora.org I am thinking about the fuel system in my 701 and am considering putting in a facet fuel pump as a booster pump The pump I am considering is an FP40105 which doesn't have a check valve and puts out 25 to 45 PSI (my understanding is the Rotax 912 can handle a max pressure of 58psi) This pump would be used to avoid vapor lock on take off and as an aux pump if the mechanical pump on the Rotax fails I would install the pump after the gascolator and after an in line fuel filter, basically next to the gascolator Are there any problems that anyone can see with such an installation? I am concerned with the greater likelihood of vapor lock with auto gas George ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 11:03:13 AM PST US Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Aux fuel pump in 701 From: Bryan Martin --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin I think your numbers are off by a factor of ten. 2.5 to 4.5 psi sounds about right for the fp40105. If your fuel is in wing tanks, you probably won't need a booster pump because the high wing 701 will gravity feed the fuel to the engine. But, if you are going to put a pump in your system, it should go before the filter. The fuel filter should be the last thing in the fuel line before the carburetors. A clean filter might not cause a problem but if it starts to clog up it will cause a flow restriction and the pressure will drop as fuel flows through it. A pump can push fuel through a partially clogged filter much better than it can suck fuel through it. Drawing suction on a fuel line is a real good way to cause vapor lock. The lower the pressure, the lower the boiling point. Even cars don't have filters installed ahead of the fuel pump, just a screen in the tank to keep out larger particles that might interfere with the pump. This subject has been covered many times in the past on this list. You can check the archives for previous posts on this subject. -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru. on 2/21/06 12:56 PM, george.mueller@aurora.org at george.mueller@aurora.org wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: george.mueller@aurora.org > > > > I am thinking about the fuel system in my 701 and am considering putting in > a facet fuel pump as a booster pump The pump I am considering is an > FP40105 which doesn't have a check valve and puts out 25 to 45 PSI (my > understanding is the Rotax 912 can handle a max pressure of 58psi) This > pump would be used to avoid vapor lock on take off and as an aux pump if > the mechanical pump on the Rotax fails I would install the pump after the > gascolator and after an in line fuel filter, basically next to the > gascolator Are there any problems that anyone can see with such an > installation? I am concerned with the greater likelihood of vapor lock > with auto gas > > > George ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 11:03:13 AM PST US Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Aux fuel pump in 701 From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" Ok re-read this...You are considering a 40105...Thats 2.5 to 4.5psi probably...Yeah its probably OK on a high wing. Depends also on how you intend to plumb it...if in series the pressure will be cumulative (unless there is som kind of pressure relief) This may well put over the pressure acceptable at the carb. If in parallel..it might still be better with the 105 as you will gain roughly 1 psi for 4 feet of elevation gain between the pump inlet and the tank. This will put your 105 pump in the 3.5 to 5.5 psi range for a 4' elevation. Its probably OK for a no mechanical pump operation in parallel. (remember if in series to account for the ressure drop of a dead pump, if it will even work at all. Have fun..:) Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of george.mueller@aurora.org Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 9:56 AM Subject: Zenith-List: Aux fuel pump in 701 --> Zenith-List message posted by: george.mueller@aurora.org I am thinking about the fuel system in my 701 and am considering putting in a facet fuel pump as a booster pump The pump I am considering is an FP40105 which doesn't have a check valve and puts out 25 to 45 PSI (my understanding is the Rotax 912 can handle a max pressure of 58psi) This pump would be used to avoid vapor lock on take off and as an aux pump if the mechanical pump on the Rotax fails I would install the pump after the gascolator and after an in line fuel filter, basically next to the gascolator Are there any problems that anyone can see with such an installation? I am concerned with the greater likelihood of vapor lock with auto gas George ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:58:59 AM PST US From: Mike Sinclair Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Application for Airworthiness Certificate --> Zenith-List message posted by: Mike Sinclair Just a little update on the confusion as to whether a revised 3180-6 was needed with my engine change, just in case any of you find yourselves in this situation one of these days. I have been on the phone a couple of times today with our local FSDO Aviation Safety Inspector (Airworthiness) and the decision was made that a revised 3180-6 wasn't need in this instance. Where the confusion begins is with the line in sec. 19 of my operating limitations that states "If the major change includes installing a different make and model of engine or propeller". Our airworthiness inspector says the current version of the operating limitations has changed the words "make and model" to "type". Such as reciprocating to turbine, or fixed pitch to inflight adjustable, or constant speed, then a new 3180-6 will need to be submitted. He did call Oklahoma City and evidently this has been a bit of a gray area and the wording was revised to clear it up a bit. He did say that my operating limitations are still in effect as is and if I should ever have to go through this again, to apply for a new set of limitations. But for now, and in case someone should question this of me, I need to add an appropriate entry in the log book that the decision that a revised 3180-6 is not needed, was made at the Wichita FSDO and is on file there. So no new inspection either. Though if any of you should have this same question in the future, I would double check with your local FAA rep. before proceeding. Moving right along and should be back in phase I real soon. I plan on first start of the new engine tomorrow. Mike Sinclair N701TD Randy Stout wrote: > When I replaced my engine, I made the necessary changes to the 8130-6, and > wrote a letter explaining what I was doing. Since I was still in my testing > period and had more than 5 hours remaining, I told them that I didn't > intend to extend the flight testing beyond 40 hours unless they informed me > of a need to do so. I think I still had 20 hours or so to go. I don't > remember what I put on the 8130-6 exactly, but you can be sure that if it's > not right, they will send it back for corrections. I would suggest calling > your local FSDO or MIDO if you need guidance. One thing I wish I would have > done that I didn't do was to send the letter "return receipt". For along > time, I kept wondering if they got it. They probably won't require a new > inspection. I would recommend getting a tech counselor to check things out > before flying. > > Randy Stout > n282rs"at"earthlink.net > www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21 > > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Mike Sinclair > > > > Hi Guys > > > > Maybe some of you have been in this situation before, and if so I > could use a little guidance. As a part of the latest rebuild I have changed > engines from a 912UL to a 912ULS. Per the operating limitations sec. 19, > and per the letter of concurence I got yesterday from our local Aviation > Safety Inspector (Airworthiness) I have to fill out a revised Form 8130-6 > (application for airworthiness certificate). I have a couple of questions. > > > > 1. Section IV of form 8130-6 (Inspection Agency Verification) says to > complete only if 14 CFR part 21.183(d) applies. As best I can figure part > 21.183(d) would not apply to this aircraft, but there is some doubt. ???? > > > > 2. Section V (FAA Representative Certification). Does this engine change > require a complete new DAR or FAA inspection? > > > Mike Sinclair N701TD ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 12:24:36 PM PST US From: JERICKSON03E@aol.com Subject: Zenith-List: 701 Top mount fuel sender instalation --> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com Has anyone used the new fuel senders, 70-10 ohm configuration, in the top mount position? I have seen the side mount now shown in the builders manual, but would like to have the top mount for easier access & maintenance. Advice & info appreciated. ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 12:24:49 PM PST US From: "Phil Maxson" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Homebuilt aircraft financing --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Phil Maxson" Mike is a smart man. This is exactly what I did. Phil Maxson 601XL/Corvair Northwest New Jersey >From: Mike >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Homebuilt aircraft financing >Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:12:23 -0800 (PST) > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: Mike > > > Are any of you financing your Zenith Aircraft? > >Why not finance it yourself by buying component kits one section at a time, >rather than the whole thing at once? You'll save on interest charges (even >though shipping costs will be slightly higher). There's really not much >sense in buying sections that you're not ready to build yet -- especially >since you would be paying interest charges on everything while much of it >sits in your garage untouched. > >Mike Fortunato >601XL ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 12:31:32 PM PST US From: LarryMcFarland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Aux fuel pump in 701 --> Zenith-List message posted by: LarryMcFarland George, I've been using a pair of 105s on my HDS and they are both after the gascolator and before the replaceable paper filter. From the filter to a T, the line branches to the Bings. Works well, but I'd question putting an annually replaceable filter before the pumps. Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com do not archive george.mueller@aurora.org wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: george.mueller@aurora.org > > >I am thinking about the fuel system in my 701 and am considering putting in >a facet fuel pump as a booster pump The pump I am considering is an >FP40105 which doesn't have a check valve and puts out 25 to 45 PSI (my >understanding is the Rotax 912 can handle a max pressure of 58psi) This >pump would be used to avoid vapor lock on take off and as an aux pump if >the mechanical pump on the Rotax fails I would install the pump after the >gascolator and after an in line fuel filter, basically next to the >gascolator Are there any problems that anyone can see with such an >installation? I am concerned with the greater likelihood of vapor lock >with auto gas > > >George > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 12:47:44 PM PST US From: JERICKSON03E@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight --> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com In a message dated 2/19/2006 12:59:52 PM Central Standard Time, squiggles@yahoo.com writes: - The ZAC fuel caps require supplemental vents. On a ground test of 20gph on a tank the tank sucked itself inwards. Subsequent tests of the remaining 3 fuel caps in my kit revealed the same behaviors What configurations of fuel caps are being used on completed 701 & 801 aircraft? The ZAC kit caps I have are vented, four places at the edges. Cap's seen at the factory have ram air tubes attached. Several older designs also have used ram tubes on the caps. Question is one of having at least free gravity flow while in flight, so the cap's need to at least be freely vented. Which leads to, what is the air pressure on the wing upper surface, where the caps live? Has anyone ever checked to understand what the effect is of venting the caps close to the wing upper surface? Searching for a good solution for fuel flow in flight. ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 01:33:22 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 Top mount fuel sender instalation --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz I just finished installation of one of the senders. I have not done one of the old ones, so I can't really address the differences. I do wonder about your comment about easier maintenance on the top mounted position. Once the nose skin is riveted in place I think it would be very hard to do any maintenance on the sender. Fortunately, I don't think it is likely to need much attention. I have some pictures if you want to see them, but I don't think there were any surprises. The only issue that caused me some trouble was getting a good ground connection to the base plate of the sender. I did that by eliminating one of the paper washers. Good luck, Paul XL wings >Has anyone used the new fuel senders, 70-10 ohm configuration, in the top >mount position? > >I have seen the side mount now shown in the builders manual, but would like >to have the top mount for easier access & maintenance. > >Advice & info appreciated. > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 01:41:39 PM PST US From: N5SL Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - Vented Tanks? --> Zenith-List message posted by: N5SL Are the 701 tanks vented? My wing tanks are vented as shown in this 601XL drawing snippet (in bubble): http://www.cooknwithgas.com/TankVent.jpg Scott Laughlin > --> Zenith-List message posted by: > JERICKSON03E@aol.com > > In a message dated 2/19/2006 12:59:52 PM Central > Standard Time, > squiggles@yahoo.com writes: > > - The ZAC fuel caps require supplemental vents. ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 02:04:55 PM PST US From: "Johann G." Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Johann G." Hello All. I am using one old fuel tank and one newer fuel tank in the wings. Both have the vented caps, but the caps are different. I do not have the fowrard facing tube in the caps. To prevent the possibility of gravity not doing its work in my wing tanks, I installed one facet 105 fuel pump behind the seats which feeds the header tank. When I turn the pump on and it has been running for a few sec. fuel seems to flow freely without the pump. So the conclusion in my setup is, you need to get the flow started and then it will flow on its own with gravity. Regards, Johann G. Iceland. Z 701 JERICKSON03E@aol.com wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com > >In a message dated 2/19/2006 12:59:52 PM Central Standard Time, >squiggles@yahoo.com writes: > >- The ZAC fuel caps require supplemental vents. On a >ground test of 20gph on a tank the tank sucked itself >inwards. Subsequent tests of the remaining 3 fuel >caps in my kit revealed the same behaviors > > >What configurations of fuel caps are being used on completed 701 & 801 >aircraft? >The ZAC kit caps I have are vented, four places at the edges. >Cap's seen at the factory have ram air tubes attached. Several older designs >also have used ram tubes on the caps. > >Question is one of having at least free gravity flow while in flight, so the >cap's need to at least be freely vented. Which leads to, what is the air >pressure on the wing upper surface, where the caps live? Has anyone ever checked to >understand what the effect is of venting the caps close to the wing upper >surface? > >Searching for a good solution for fuel flow in flight. > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 02:17:01 PM PST US Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - Vented Tanks? From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" Yup tank vents...A quick seminar. 1) All tanks must be vented somehow (duh!) 2) Vent tanks into high pressure areas 3) Take advantage of total (forward ram) pressure 4) make sure vent can drain 5) don't fly in icing conditions! All of this means sticking the vent below the wing (or fuselage) and cutting a 45 deg angle on the end, as shown on Scott's drawing...You don't want to use a pitot tube setup as this can collect water/ice. If you have to stick a vent above the wing it needs to be high enough to get out the low pressure air. If on the bottom it still should be long enough to escape the boundary layer (about an inch I believe) Stay below about 12k'when using autofuel unless to do a vapour pressure check on a fuel sample....Don't want it boiling off on us do we?...:) Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N5SL Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 1:38 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - Vented Tanks? --> Zenith-List message posted by: N5SL Are the 701 tanks vented? My wing tanks are vented as shown in this 601XL drawing snippet (in bubble): http://www.cooknwithgas.com/TankVent.jpg Scott Laughlin ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 02:31:16 PM PST US Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" This is not ideal but probably workable because the wing tanks are feeding the header. What is happening here is the vacuum in the tank (vented to a low pressure area above the wing) is preventing the fuel from flowing downhill. You then turn on the pump and suck on the bottom of the fuel to get it moving. "Vacuum" and "suck" are not good terms for a fuel system....If this was a high altitude plane I can guarantee you would be boiling fuel in the tank and potentially vapour locking a pump. Not an ideal setup but workable because 701 won't normally go that high and you are not feeding the engine directly from the wing tanks. If this was a direct feed I would want a better venting system. Farnk -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Johann G. Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 2:00 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Johann G." Hello All. I am using one old fuel tank and one newer fuel tank in the wings. Both have the vented caps, but the caps are different. I do not have the fowrard facing tube in the caps. To prevent the possibility of gravity not doing its work in my wing tanks, I installed one facet 105 fuel pump behind the seats which feeds the header tank. When I turn the pump on and it has been running for a few sec. fuel seems to flow freely without the pump. So the conclusion in my setup is, you need to get the flow started and then it will flow on its own with gravity. Regards, Johann G. Iceland. Z 701 JERICKSON03E@aol.com wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com > >In a message dated 2/19/2006 12:59:52 PM Central Standard Time, >squiggles@yahoo.com writes: > >- The ZAC fuel caps require supplemental vents. On a ground test of >20gph on a tank the tank sucked itself inwards. Subsequent tests of >the remaining 3 fuel caps in my kit revealed the same behaviors > > >What configurations of fuel caps are being used on completed 701 & 801 >aircraft? >The ZAC kit caps I have are vented, four places at the edges. >Cap's seen at the factory have ram air tubes attached. Several older >designs also have used ram tubes on the caps. > >Question is one of having at least free gravity flow while in flight, >so the cap's need to at least be freely vented. Which leads to, what is >the air pressure on the wing upper surface, where the caps live? Has >anyone ever checked to understand what the effect is of venting the >caps close to the wing upper surface? > >Searching for a good solution for fuel flow in flight. > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 03:20:44 PM PST US From: nyterminat@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Application for Airworthiness Certificate --> Zenith-List message posted by: nyterminat@aol.com Way to go Mike. I hope that you will be in the air soon. The exact thing that you described was told to me by my DAR when he inspected my plane. Bob Spudis N701ZX 90-100 degrees here in Ghana Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: Mike Sinclair Sent: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:55:02 -0600 Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Application for Airworthiness Certificate --> Zenith-List message posted by: Mike Sinclair Just a little update on the confusion as to whether a revised 3180-6 was needed with my engine change, just in case any of you find yourselves in this situation one of these days. I have been on the phone a couple of times today with our local FSDO Aviation Safety Inspector (Airworthiness) and the decision was made that a revised 3180-6 wasn't need in this instance. Where the confusion begins is with the line in sec. 19 of my operating limitations that states "If the major change includes installing a different make and model of engine or propeller". Our airworthiness inspector says the current version of the operating limitations has changed the words "make and model" to "type". Such as reciprocating to turbine, or fixed pitch to inflight adjustable, or constant speed, then a new 3180-6 will need to be submitted. He did call Oklahoma City and evidently this has been a bit of a gray area and the wording was revised to clear it up a bit. He did say that my operating limitations are still in effect as is and if I should ever have to go through this again, to apply for a new set of limitations. But for now, and in case someone should question this of me, I need to add an appropriate entry in the log book that the decision that a revised 3180-6 is not needed, was made at the Wichita FSDO and is on file there. So no new inspection either. Though if any of you should have this same question in the future, I would double check with your local FAA rep. before proceeding. Moving right along and should be back in phase I real soon. I plan on first start of the new engine tomorrow. Mike Sinclair N701TD Randy Stout wrote: > When I replaced my engine, I made the necessary changes to the 8130-6, and > wrote a letter explaining what I was doing. Since I was still in my testing > period and had more than 5 hours remaining, I told them that I didn't > intend to extend the flight testing beyond 40 hours unless they informed me > of a need to do so. I think I still had 20 hours or so to go. I don't > remember what I put on the 8130-6 exactly, but you can be sure that if it's > not right, they will send it back for corrections. I would suggest calling > your local FSDO or MIDO if you need guidance. One thing I wish I would have > done that I didn't do was to send the letter "return receipt". For along > time, I kept wondering if they got it. They probably won't require a new > inspection. I would recommend getting a tech counselor to check things out > before flying. > > Randy Stout > n282rs"at"earthlink.net > www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21 > > > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Mike Sinclair > > > > Hi Guys > > > > Maybe some of you have been in this situation before, and if so I > could use a little guidance. As a part of the latest rebuild I have changed > engines from a 912UL to a 912ULS. Per the operating limitations sec. 19, > and per the letter of concurence I got yesterday from our local Aviation > Safety Inspector (Airworthiness) I have to fill out a revised Form 8130-6 > (application for airworthiness certificate). I have a couple of questions. > > > > 1. Section IV of form 8130-6 (Inspection Agency Verification) says to > complete only if 14 CFR part 21.183(d) applies. As best I can figure part > 21.183(d) would not apply to this aircraft, but there is some doubt. ???? > > > > 2. Section V (FAA Representative Certification). Does this engine change > require a complete new DAR or FAA inspection? > > > Mike Sinclair N701TD ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 03:47:09 PM PST US From: "John Marzulli" Subject: Zenith-List: Any thoughts on the 701 on floats? --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Marzulli" I've been considering building a 701 for a long time and I'm getting closer everyday. The most important question in my mind is how well does the 701 do on floats? All of my training ( and checkride ) for the ASES ticket was done in a 180HP Top Cub... a very overpowered aircraft. I consider this a factor since I never really had to finese the plane up except when doing a partial power glassy water takeoff. My assumption is that a 701 on floats would do best with the 100HP rotax when at gross weight or high density altitude. So I was wondering a few things: - First what is the quality of the Skyshops/Czech floats? - Has anyone installed Edos or Wiplines? - Has Zenith supported you during the build for floats that were not from Skyshops? - Is there a big difference between the various manufacturers/installations in regards to ease of getting on the step or stability during step taxing? - Does the 701 have enough aileron authority to do well in a cross-wind landing despite it's light weight? - Who did you use to insure the plane? Is the premium ridiculous? - And the biggest question is has anyone setup their 701 for easy gear swap between floats and tricycle gear? I live in Seattle and what I want is a plane I can use to go camping with in the mountain lakes or use to tour Alaska with. Thanks ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 04:39:09 PM PST US From: JERICKSON03E@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 Top mount fuel sender instalation --> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com In a message dated 2/21/2006 3:41:39 PM Central Standard Time, p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net writes: I do wonder about your comment about easier maintenance on the top mounted position. Once the nose skin is riveted in place I think it would be very hard to do any maintenance on the sender. Fortunately, I don't think it is likely to need much attention. Thanks Paul, The senders on the 701 are mounted under the top skin, with covers. The nose skin is not involved. another way to install them is at the end of the tank, not easy to access without removing skin, so it seems. About maintenance, perhaps they are good enough so as to not require maintenance. This is one reason that I am going to the new senders, 70-10 ohm. But, things that move, have elect flow, and otherwise hide away,,, are maintenance prone. Actually a cork on a wire would be useful if it would fit. ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 05:27:07 PM PST US From: Gary Gower Subject: Re: Zenith-List: re: prop pitch (tach acuracy) --> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower I will add one VERY Important thing: Before doing the full throttle test of the propeller pitch. With a optical Tach and a hand calculator, check the acuracy of your airplane tach... a faulty (showing less rpms than real) tach, can over rev your engine without you noticing and that is a real danger. Most of the modern tachs are very acurate, but Murphy sometimes visits the factories :-) Also if in the future ( some "X" hours later) during the time you own the plane, you notice something about your tach readings (higher or lower readings) first check the tach, then go to something else. I almost rebuilt an engine once and was the tach... Saludos Gary Gower. Zed Smith wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith Suggest you use whatever blade setting gives 5500 rpm max at wide open throttle, warm engine, etc, with the plane tied to an anchor. Be prepared for the brakes NOT to hold, tires to slide on grass, Murphy's Law mishaps. Others will have variations of this, but just don't exceed the 5800 mark on takeoff. Happy flying. do not archive Zed/701/R912/same 90+% --------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 05:27:38 PM PST US From: "n801bh@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight --> Zenith-List message posted by: "n801bh@netzero.com" What configurations of fuel caps are being used on completed 701 & 801 aircraft? The ZAC kit caps I have are vented, four places at the edges. Cap's seen at the factory have ram air tubes attached. Several older designs also have used ram tubes on the caps. Question is one of having at least free gravity flow while in flight, so the cap's need to at least be freely vented. Which leads to, what is the air pressure on the wing upper surface, where the caps live? Has anyone ever checked to understand what the effect is of venting the caps close to the wing upper surface? Searching for a good solution for fuel flow in flight. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// I can tell you guys what happens on my 801. I built 17 gal aux tanks that sit outboard of the stock tanks and are plumbed together at the rear. The inner tanks fill the outer tanks through the transfer line. I kept it VERY simple because most experimental planes go down because of poor fuel systems. There are a few things my 801 does that most other ones do too. In the beginning I ran the stock ZAC caps on my inner tanks. The low pressure created on the top surface of the thick STOL wings that Chris Heinz designed is alot more then most of us can realize. If I fill my tanks even close to the top, the suction will draw out fuel and it runs down the top of the wing, This happens through the vent openings that are in the cap. I painted my plane with Dupont Imron and believe it or not the paint is now stained with blue dye that's in 100LL. Ya I am pissed but I don't loose sleep over it. When I built my aux tanks I welded a bung on the top outer end panel of the tanks just like ZAC provides with their stock ones. I ran a 3/16" tube from there down and protruding through the lower skin to vent the tanks. This uses the high pressure thats on the underside of the wing. To fix the fuel from being drawn through the vent openings in the cap I expoxied the holes closed and use my other vents to breath the fuel system. I also tied both wings together using the ports that are on the inner top end surfaces of the stock tanks that ZAC provide. This port is for the return line if one is running a fuel injection setup that needs a fuel return to the tank. My main concern was two fold. The first was the 801 that crashed in Texas because of poor tank venting in it first few flights. It was clear that caused the downing of that plane. My other concern was most 801's are known to empty the left tank twice as fast as the right tank if they are used together, ie, fuel valve on both. Well, guess what. I thought I had the solution to that problem and mine STILL uses more fuel from the left tank when I have my fuel valves se! t to bot h. All I can figure is that the circular flow of the prop hits both wings in different ways and that causes the uneven flows. I have resigned to that fact and manage my fuel by using my left/right fuel valves as needed. I can say my setup does work and shows no sign of vent problems and I am at the stage of testing my firebreathing monster that I have removed most of the HP limiting devices, IE, restrictor plates, ignition RPM chips,etc I initially installed on my plane to prevent it from breaking in half during full power climbs. Currently I am burning 16+ gph during takeoff and throttle it back to 5.8-6.2 gph for cruise. I have never had a moment where the tanks didn't vent properly at climb power settings. FWIW.... do not archive Ben Haas N801BH www.haaspowerair.com What configurations of fuel caps are being used on completed 701 801 aircraft? The ZAC kit caps I have are vented, four places at the edges. Cap's seen at the factory have ram air tubes attached. Several older designs also have used ram tubes on the caps. Question is one of having at least free gravity flow while in flight, so the cap's need to at least be freely vented. Which leads to, what is the air pressure on the wing upper surface, where the caps live? Has anyone ever checked to understand what the effect is of venting the caps close to the wing upper surface? Searching for a good solution for fuel flow in flight. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// I cantell you guys what happens on my 801. I built 17 gal aux tanks that sit outboard of the stock tanks and are plumbed together at the rear. The inner tanks fill the outer tanks through the transfer line. I kept it VERY simple because most experimental planes go down because of poor fuel systems. There are a few things my 801 does that most other ones do too. In the beginning I ran the stock ZAC caps on my inner tanks. The low pressure createdon the top surface of the thick STOLwings that Chris Heinz designedis alot more then most of us can realize. If I fill my tanks even close to the top, the suction will draw out fuel and it runs down the top of the wing, This happens through the vent openings that are in the cap. I painted my plane with Dupont Imron and believe it or not the paint is now stained with blue dye that's in 100LL. Ya I am pissed but I don't loose sleep over it. WhenI built my aux tanks I welded a bung on the top outer end panel of the tanks just like ZAC provides with their stock ones. I ran a 3/16" tube from there down and protruding through the lower skin to vent the tanks. This uses the high pressure thats on the underside of the wing. To fix the fuel from being drawn through the vent openings in the cap I expoxied the holes closed and use my other vents to breath the fuel system. I also tiedboth wings together using the ports that are on the inner top end surfaces of the stock tanks that ZAC provide. This port is for the return line if one is running a fuel injection setup that needs a fuel return to the tank. My main concern was two fold. The first was the 801 that crashed in Texas because of poor tank venting in it first few flights. It was clear that caused the downing of that plane. My other concern was most 801's are known to empty the left tank twice as fast as the right tank if they areused together, ie, fuel valve on both.Well, guess what. I thought I had the solution to that problem and mine STILL uses more fuel from the left tank when I have my fuel valves set to both. All! I can f igure is that the circular flow of the prop hits both wings in different ways and that causes the uneven flows. I have resigned to that fact and manage my fuel by usingmy left/right fuel valvesas needed. I can say my setup does work and shows no sign of vent problemsand I am at the stage of testing my firebreathing monster that I have removed most of the HP limiting devices,IE, restrictor plates, ignition RPM chips,etcI initially installed on my plane to prevent it from breaking in half during full power climbs. Currently I am burning 16+ gph during takeoff and throttle it back to 5.8-6.2 gph for cruise. I have never had a moment where the tanks didn't vent properly at climb power settings. FWIW.... do not archive BenHaas N801BH www.haaspowerair.com ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 07:30:30 PM PST US From: Terry Turnquist Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Homebuilt aircraft financing --> Zenith-List message posted by: Terry Turnquist John, you might consider scratch building..that'll slow down your build progress but the tradeoff is it'll save you a bunch of money! Terry Turnquist St. Peters, MO John Hines wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" Are any of you financing your Zenith Aircraft? If so, with who? Zenith has several links to financing companies on their web site. I'm almost done with my tail kit and I have realized that I can build it faster than I can afford to pay for it. Any advise??? John Hines www.johnsplane.com John Hines Manager Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. 901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200 Rogers, AR 72756 Tel: 479-878-2449 Mob: 479-366-4783 Fax: 479-631-6224 John.Hines@craftontull.com --------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 07:51:45 PM PST US From: "Jeff Davidson" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Homebuilt aircraft financing --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff Davidson" Another benefit of buying component kits as you build is that you get the benefit of improvements made to the kit that are available at the time you buy. With a manufacturer like ZAC, who has stood the test of time in the business, you can be comfortable that they will be there when you need the next kit. Jeff Davidson > > > Are any of you financing your Zenith Aircraft? > >Why not finance it yourself by buying component kits one section at a time, >rather than the whole thing at once? ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 08:09:46 PM PST US From: Carlos Sa Subject: RE : Re: Zenith-List: Homebuilt aircraft financing --> Zenith-List message posted by: Carlos Sa ...and, if you are as fast as I am, the expenses will be spread over such a long period of time, you won't even notice! Carlos CH601-HD, plans Building since 1998 - almost a tradition... ... but do not archive --- Terry Turnquist a crit : > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Terry Turnquist > > John, you might consider scratch building..that'll slow down your build progress but the > tradeoff is it'll save you a bunch of money! > > Terry Turnquist > St. Peters, MO > > > > John Hines wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" > > Are any of you financing your Zenith Aircraft? If so, with who? Zenith > has several links to financing companies on their web site. > I'm almost done with my tail kit and I > have realized that I can build it faster than I can afford to pay for > it. Any advise??? > > John Hines Lche-vitrine ou lche-cran ? magasinage.yahoo.ca ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 08:12:56 PM PST US From: "T. Graziano" Subject: Zenith-List: Re: wing attachment and control cables --> Zenith-List message posted by: "T. Graziano" John, The way I installed my wings was with the use of an engine hoist with two straps supporting the wing about its span wise CG. You can get pretty precise with the hydraulic lifting ram. I supported the wing on two padded saw horses before lifting. I also used pieces of 2x4s at the aft channel to prevent the straps from distorting the wing skin's aft edges and made sure the straps would not distort the leading edge. I was able to trial fit and install thewings without help. I used handled 5/16 inch drift pins (you can also use modified 5/16 inch bolts) which I tapered/bullet nosed to help align the holes in the wing spar to center spar section. You want these aids to have a smooth surface finish to prevent scratching or gouging the critical spar attach bolt holes, which would create stress risers. With the use of a mirror and flashlight, once you have one of the center holes line up and pinned, careful use of the engine hoist will permit you to align the other holes for pinning. (I procured a complete XL kit from Zenith. Zenith match drills/reams the wing spars to center spar attach holes, so you know that all 6 holes per wing should match up precisely). After pinning, or if you wish temporarily bolting, the wing spars to the center spar, you can then clamp the aft wing channel (spar) to the fuselage fitting to check/adjust for alignment, incidence etc, before drilling for the aft spar attachment. After this is done, you can cleco the flaps to check for flap settings, jack screw microswitch adjustments etc and also cleco the ailerons and temporarily attach the bellcrank pushrod.. You may also at this time check your wing skin trim and trim as required for the fuselage to wing seal fit. As far as the aileron control cables, I had them installed in the wing and attached to the aileron bellcrank with excess cable hanging out. I did the final cable cut and swaging after I had drilled and temporarily bolted the aft spar and clecoed the ailerons. I final rigged and safetied the turnbuckles for the ailerons at the airport. One thing about the Zenith kits is that they provide more cable than you need so as to permit this. The above is the way I did it before taking the wings and fuselage to the airport for final assembly. I am sure there are many more ways to skin this cat, though. Tony Graziano 601XL N493TG 65+ hours > Time: 08:56:27 AM PST US > From: john butterfield > Subject: Zenith-List: wing attachment and control cables > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: john butterfield > > hi list > after looking at my fuse i started wondering how hard > it would be to attach the wings. I was thinking of > taking off the rear protion of the wing gigs and just > seeing if the holes match, but like most of my > thoughts, something always seems to be different. any > suggestions on how to make the final attachment > easier. > > also, is there plenty of play in the flap arm when > attaching to the actual flap. the plans seem > confusing to me in that the diagram shows the unit in > the flap down position, but looks to me like it is the > in the flaps up position. > > as to the control cables, should i attach the cables > to the stick, and rudder and run them out to the > control surfaces and then attanch them later when > assembling the machine. > > as you can see, my logical minds sometimes abandons me > regards > john butterfield > XL corvair ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 09:48:29 PM PST US From: Gary Gower Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight Altitude. --> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower Hello Frank, I will like to learn more about it, any leads? We do fly here with autogas our 701 (and several other airplanes with 912S engines, Kitfox, QS GT 500, etc) from 6,000 to around 12,000 ft ASL (depending on direction of flight) because here most area around has 10,000 plus mountains and "low land" is 4,000 ft ASL... How do gasoline boil with altitude???? (limited english and unkown subject.) Thanks a lot. Saludos Gary Gower. "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" This is not ideal but probably workable because the wing tanks are feeding the header. What is happening here is the vacuum in the tank (vented to a low pressure area above the wing) is preventing the fuel from flowing downhill. You then turn on the pump and suck on the bottom of the fuel to get it moving. "Vacuum" and "suck" are not good terms for a fuel system....If this was a high altitude plane I can guarantee you would be boiling fuel in the tank and potentially vapour locking a pump. Not an ideal setup but workable because 701 won't normally go that high and you are not feeding the engine directly from the wing tanks. If this was a direct feed I would want a better venting system. Farnk -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Johann G. Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 2:00 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Crosswind - The First Step Toward the Next Flight --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Johann G." Hello All. I am using one old fuel tank and one newer fuel tank in the wings. Both have the vented caps, but the caps are different. I do not have the fowrard facing tube in the caps. To prevent the possibility of gravity not doing its work in my wing tanks, I installed one facet 105 fuel pump behind the seats which feeds the header tank. When I turn the pump on and it has been running for a few sec. fuel seems to flow freely without the pump. So the conclusion in my setup is, you need to get the flow started and then it will flow on its own with gravity. Regards, Johann G. Iceland. Z 701 JERICKSON03E@aol.com wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com > >In a message dated 2/19/2006 12:59:52 PM Central Standard Time, >squiggles@yahoo.com writes: > >- The ZAC fuel caps require supplemental vents. On a ground test of >20gph on a tank the tank sucked itself inwards. Subsequent tests of >the remaining 3 fuel caps in my kit revealed the same behaviors > > >What configurations of fuel caps are being used on completed 701 & 801 >aircraft? >The ZAC kit caps I have are vented, four places at the edges. >Cap's seen at the factory have ram air tubes attached. Several older >designs also have used ram tubes on the caps. > >Question is one of having at least free gravity flow while in flight, >so the cap's need to at least be freely vented. Which leads to, what is >the air pressure on the wing upper surface, where the caps live? Has >anyone ever checked to understand what the effect is of venting the >caps close to the wing upper surface? > >Searching for a good solution for fuel flow in flight. > --------------------------------- Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 09:55:25 PM PST US From: Gary Gower Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Any thoughts on the 701 on floats? --> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower Hello John, I will advise you to contact Chip, from Chez Aircraft works, directly, probably he will contact you soon, because he normally monitors the list. but has been a while he hasnt post... I will trust hands off his advise and comments, his email is aircraft@czaw.cz He personally has won several amph airplane events and races with 601 and also 701 float equiped airplanes in Europe. Saludos Gary Gower John Marzulli wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Marzulli" I've been considering building a 701 for a long time and I'm getting closer everyday. The most important question in my mind is how well does the 701 do on floats? All of my training ( and checkride ) for the ASES ticket was done in a 180HP Top Cub... a very overpowered aircraft. I consider this a factor since I never really had to finese the plane up except when doing a partial power glassy water takeoff. My assumption is that a 701 on floats would do best with the 100HP rotax when at gross weight or high density altitude. So I was wondering a few things: - First what is the quality of the Skyshops/Czech floats? - Has anyone installed Edos or Wiplines? - Has Zenith supported you during the build for floats that were not from Skyshops? - Is there a big difference between the various manufacturers/installations in regards to ease of getting on the step or stability during step taxing? - Does the 701 have enough aileron authority to do well in a cross-wind landing despite it's light weight? - Who did you use to insure the plane? Is the premium ridiculous? - And the biggest question is has anyone setup their 701 for easy gear swap between floats and tricycle gear? I live in Seattle and what I want is a plane I can use to go camping with in the mountain lakes or use to tour Alaska with. Thanks --------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 11:40:28 PM PST US From: "Chip W. Erwin" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Any thoughts on the 701 on floats? --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Chip W. Erwin" OK, I will make some brief comments. Please scroll down Chip W. Erwin CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS LUCNI 1824 686 02 STARE MESTO, CZECH REPUBLIC TEL: +420 572 543 456 FAX: +420 572 543 692 USA FAX: 772-264-0936 Mobile: +420 602 342 717 E-MAIL: AIRCRAFT@CZAW.CZ WWW.AIRPLANE.CZ Hello John, I will advise you to contact Chip, from Chez Aircraft works, directly, probably he will contact you soon, because he normally monitors the list. but has been a while he hasnt post... I will trust hands off his advise and comments, his email is aircraft@czaw.cz He personally has won several amph airplane events and races with 601 and also 701 float equiped airplanes in Europe. My assumption is that a 701 on floats would do best with the 100HP rotax when at gross weight or high density altitude. So I was wondering a few things: - First what is the quality of the Skyshops/Czech floats? VERY HIGH ACCORDING TO OUR CUSTOMERS - Has anyone installed Edos or Wiplines?TOO BIG, TOO HEAVY, AND TOO EXPENSIVE FOR THE 701 - Has Zenith supported you during the build for floats that were not from Skyshops?NO, NOT NECESSARY AS WE OFFER FINISHED FLOATS ONLY. - Is there a big difference between the various manufacturers/installations in regards to ease of getting on the step or stability during step taxing? WE HAVE ONE 701 FLOAT AND INSTALLATION KIT. I AM NOT SURE WHAT OTHER MANUFACTURE YOU ARE REFERRING TO. - Does the 701 have enough aileron authority to do well in a cross-wind landing despite it's light weight? YES. AS A STOL DESIGN IT HAS PLENTY OF AILERON AUTHORITY. - Who did you use to insure the plane? Is the premium ridiculous? - And the biggest question is has anyone setup their 701 for easy gear swap between floats and tricycle gear? OURS CAN BE DONE IN 1 DAY WITH 2 PEOPLE. CZAW HAS COMPLETELY REDESIGNED THE FLOATS AND INSTALLATION. PLUS WE HAVE MADE MANY IMPROVEMENTS ON THE AIRCRAFT LIKE MUCH NICER COWL. THE REULTS ARE A 701 AMPHIB THAT CRUISES FASTER ON FLOATS THAN MANY 701S WITHOUT FLOATS. WE DO SUGGEST THE 100HP ROTAX. AND THE NEW 4-WHEEL AMPHIBS. WE MAKE MANY OF THIS COMBINATION OFR EUROPEAN CUSTOMERS. I DO FLY THEM OFTEN. THIS IS REALLY ONE NICE FLOATPLANE. WATER PERFORMANCE IS EXCELLENT. CWE