---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 07/14/06: 30 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:55 AM - Re: Zenith-List Digest: Zinc Chromate (Scott Thatcher) 2. 05:00 AM - Builders Dinner (Zodie Rocket) 3. 07:01 AM - Re: To paint or not to paint (Bill Naumuk) 4. 08:28 AM - Re: A couple of 601XL Questions () 5. 08:32 AM - Re: A couple of 601XL Questions () 6. 08:35 AM - Re: Re: Stopped prop in glide () 7. 08:46 AM - ...pic of the day... (Jari Kaija) 8. 08:51 AM - Re: Re: Stopped prop in glide () 9. 09:07 AM - Re: ...pic of the day... (Craig Payne) 10. 10:16 AM - TP vs 801 (Keystone Engineering LLC) 11. 10:38 AM - Re: Sun Shade (Tommy Walker) 12. 10:56 AM - Re: Sun Shade () 13. 11:21 AM - Re: Sun Shade (Randy Bryant) 14. 11:29 AM - Re: TP vs 801 (ihab.awad@gmail.com) 15. 11:48 AM - Re: Sun Shade () 16. 01:20 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Robert L. Stone) 17. 01:34 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Craig Payne) 18. 02:02 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Jim Pellien) 19. 02:12 PM - Re: A couple of 601XL Questions (Randy L. Thwing) 20. 02:30 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Craig Payne) 21. 02:35 PM - Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Jeff) 22. 03:05 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Dave) 23. 03:05 PM - Re: Sun Shade (B Johnson) 24. 03:31 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Jim Pellien) 25. 03:41 PM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Jim Pellien) 26. 04:18 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Bryan Martin) 27. 09:22 PM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Jeff) 28. 09:43 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Paul Mulwitz) 29. 09:46 PM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Craig Moore) 30. 09:57 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Paul Mulwitz) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:55:40 AM PST US From: "Scott Thatcher" Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Zenith-List Digest: Zinc Chromate --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Scott Thatcher" Here is a source for ZC that costs 4.95 per can: http://www.skygeek.com/a7-6889a.html I bought 6 less than a year ago and prior to that was buying the marine version from Tempo at 9+ per can. Scott Thatcher 601XL... working on fuselage ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 05:00:47 AM PST US From: "Zodie Rocket" Subject: Zenith-List: Builders Dinner Hi Folks, it=92s that time of year again, I=92m trying to get an idea on the attendance for the Zenair Builders Dinner being held at Oshkosh Zenair=99 Builders Dinner: Thursday, July 27, 2006: 6:00 - 8:00 pm. Robbins Restaurant, 1810 Omro Road (Hwy 21), Oshkosh, WI. (buffet dinner; approx. $16.00 pp.) Please send me an E-Mail at HYPERLINK "mailto:Oshkosh@can-zacaviation.com"Oshkosh@can-zacaviation.com to RSVP Mark Townsend Can-Zac Aviation Ltd. HYPERLINK "mailto:president@can-zacaviation.com"president@can-zacaviation.com HYPERLINK "http://www.can-zacaviation.com/"www.can-zacaviation.com -- 7/13/2006 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:01:53 AM PST US From: "Bill Naumuk" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: To paint or not to paint Gary- I agree, it will be a beautiful plane- you don't have the expense of painting, and it will be lighter, but tt's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. It reminds me of my uncle who had a Lyman wood boat. Absolutely gorgeous compared to the cookie cutter fiberglass boats, but he spent as much time stripping and revarnishing every year as he did water skiing. I'm too lazy for that, and I'll be the first to admit that there are a couple of "Smileys" that can benefit from a couple of heavy coats of primer! Bill do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary Gower To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 3:56 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: To paint or not to paint I think that if one builder decides to fly first and paint later, the best second option will be to polish the metal, some part every week end and add some trim, Yes I know, lots of cleaning and repolishing later, but will be a beautiful airplane. Just a thought. Saludos Gary Gower do not archive. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 08:28:19 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: A couple of 601XL Questions --> Zenith-List message posted by: You're in Las Vegas and you have to spend money on a hot tub to get women to disrobe? Hmmm....... something is amiss here. Ed Moody II ---- "Randy L. Thwing" wrote: > I have never spared any expense, in any area, for any thing, that encourages women to take their clothes off. > > A hot tub is one of the best investments in this endeavor. > do not archive ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 08:32:10 AM PST US From: Subject: RE: Zenith-List: A couple of 601XL Questions --> Zenith-List message posted by: Tell her that the instruments allow you to divert your attention to her inflight. Ed Moody II ---- Zodie Rocket wrote: > Gents if you happen to see me running down the road, it is due to the > fact that my wife just found out how much I spent on the instrument > panel ! Dont stop ! Just back up and run me over ! It will be a more > humane death then at the hands of a woman wanting a hot tub but lost > over the planes panel! ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:35:07 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Stopped prop in glide --> Zenith-List message posted by: Just the opposite, Jim. A feathered prop is one on which the blades are turned flat to the rotation and inline with the airflow to reduce drag. At least that's what I was taught. Ed Moody II Do Not Archive ---- James Ferris wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: James Ferris > > When you say that the nonrotating is much more > important than the actual feathering of the prop you > are saying that the airfoil of the prop has more drag > than the flat plate area of the prop and that is > nonsense. > Jim ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:46:09 AM PST US From: "Jari Kaija" Subject: Zenith-List: ...pic of the day... Do Not Archive ---------------------------------- http://www.jarikaija.com http://www.project-ch701.net ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:51:58 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Stopped prop in glide --> Zenith-List message posted by: As an afterthought, I should have been more clear. The biggest reduction in drag occurs as the prop quits rotating. Feathering the prop (turning the blades inline with the airflow) further reduces the drag, but Randy is correct; the additional reduction in drag is not as great as stopping the rotation. Sorry if I clouded the issue with my original response, Ed Moody II ---- Randy Bryant wrote: > I'm saying that a rotating prop must cause more drag than a non-rotating prop. > Randy > > Do Not Archive > > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: James Ferris > > > > When you say that the nonrotating is much more > > important than the actual feathering of the prop you > > are saying that the airfoil of the prop has more drag > > than the flat plate area of the prop and that is > > nonsense. ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:07:36 AM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: ...pic of the day... Now that is a short airstrip! -- Craig do not archive _____ [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jari Kaija Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 9:44 AM Do Not Archive ---------------------------------- http://www.jarikaija.com http://www.project-ch701.net ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 10:16:45 AM PST US From: Keystone Engineering LLC Subject: Zenith-List: TP vs 801 Frank I have about 800 hrs in a Tri pacer and another 300 in a pacer. I liked them and they were great to fly. You can not expect them to perform like a super cub or a Cessna. If you were willing to either keep them light or have long runways they were fine. I like the way you could raise the nose with power. I got into them because they were so cheap to buy. I have 250 hrs or so in the 801. The 801 really gets off the ground faster. I like being able to do my own maintenance and annuals. The tri pacer glides better than the 801. All the stories you hear about a tri pacer falling out of the sky are from guys who don't have much time in them but have lots of time in Cessna. The tri pacer like the 801 don't fly like a Cessna which is what most pilots use as a reference. The 801 is really a specialty airplane. It is made to get off the ground short. RVs are made to go fast.... Figure out what you want to with your plane, then buy a plane that fits that mission within your ability and budget. Bill Wilcox N801BW Valdez, AK Soon to be on floats. 260 Hrs --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Frank Roskind" So what other comparisons can you make between the Tri-Pacer and the 801? Tripacers seem to be among the least expensive certified aircraft, and seem worthy of consideration. ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 10:38:53 AM PST US From: "Tommy Walker" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade 701 Builders, Down here in the Sunny South: http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?country=US&address=&city=Sunny+South&st ate=AL it gets quite warm during the summer. I've thought about getting some of the film that installers use on windows to cover my lexan skylight. Has anyone tried that? Thanks and Do Not Archive Tommy Walker in Alabama -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of PHFD400@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 1:32 PM To: zenith-list@matronics.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Sun Shade I tried the suction cup type of sun shade, you can get them at the local auto parts stores. I got tired of the little round spots left from the suction cups, or falling off when you come in for a landing. I now have the slide sun shade the Van's aircraft uses on the RV-6 type canopys. I called the company (Kroger sun shade) that makes them for Van and told them I needed about 12 inch longer shade. He made one up for me and it works great. You can slide it back to the rear of the canopy and lock in place by a small thumb type screw. It is a light grey colored material and slides on a "C" type aluminum channel that attaches to the top of the canopy with double 3M type provided with the sun shade kit. Very easy to install, just have to make sure you bend the sliding "C" channel to the exact curvature of the top of your canopy. Here is the web site for the company, they will make up what ever size you need. I had them extend there stock item by 12 inches and it works great on my 601HDS. http://cleavelandtool.com/kogercompany/sunshade.htm Jim Olson Murphy, NC CH601HDS N56BJ 285 hrs ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 10:56:42 AM PST US From: Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: The drawback with tinting is that it doesn't retract at night or other low visibility times. I'd go for the retractable shade, Tommy. Ed ---- Tommy Walker wrote: > it gets quite warm during the summer. I've thought about getting some of > the film that installers use on windows to cover my lexan skylight. Has > anyone tried that? Do Not Archive ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 11:21:51 AM PST US From: "Randy Bryant" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Bryant" What about the tinted canopies some people use on the XL's...? Do you think there'd be the same issue? I'm debating this in the back of my mind, now, for when the time comes... Thanks, Randy XL Wings - Plans Only http://www.n344rb.com Do Not Archive ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 1:52 PM > --> Zenith-List message posted by: > > The drawback with tinting is that it doesn't retract at night or other low > visibility times. I'd go for the retractable shade, Tommy. > > Ed > > ---- Tommy Walker wrote: >> it gets quite warm during the summer. I've thought about getting some of >> the film that installers use on windows to cover my lexan skylight. Has >> anyone tried that? > > Do Not Archive > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 11:29:51 AM PST US From: ihab.awad@gmail.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: TP vs 801 --> Zenith-List message posted by: ihab.awad@gmail.com On 7/14/06, Keystone Engineering LLC wrote: > Figure out what you want to with your plane, then buy a plane that fits that > mission within your ability and budget. ... Bill Wilcox ... Valdez, AK Yes, or -- move to Alaska so you can do what you would *really* like to do with the plane you'd *really* like to build! Ihab DO NOT ARCHIVE -- Ihab A.B. Awad, Palo Alto, CA ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 11:48:46 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: Yep, I had some misgivings about the standard tinted canopy for my XL kit because I want to be able to fly at night. However, flying in the demo I found that the tint was not very dark at all so I went along with that when I ordered. On the other hand, due to the minimal tint in the canopy, I will be installing some sort of sunshade, probably the Kroger shade which has been discussed here recently. Ed ---- Randy Bryant wrote: > > What about the tinted canopies some people use on the XL's...? ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 01:20:17 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Stone" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robert L. Stone" Randy, If you are building your XL in compliance with the Light Sport Plane criteria, you cannot fly at night so a tinted canopy would be the way to go. That's the way I am going but I don't think a tinted canopy is going to keep the heat out as much as a shade so I plan to have both. I agree with the member who says it's better to use the Van's sliding shade rather that the suction cup type for the same reasons he stated. Bob Stone, Harker Heights, Tx Building an XL Do not Archive ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 1:18 PM > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Bryant" > > > What about the tinted canopies some people use on the XL's...? Do you > think there'd be the same issue? I'm debating this in the back of my > mind, now, for when the time comes... > > Thanks, > > Randy > XL Wings - Plans Only > http://www.n344rb.com > > Do Not Archive > > > ----- Original Message ----- > Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 1:52 PM > > >> --> Zenith-List message posted by: >> >> The drawback with tinting is that it doesn't retract at night or other >> low visibility times. I'd go for the retractable shade, Tommy. >> >> Ed >> >> ---- Tommy Walker wrote: >>> it gets quite warm during the summer. I've thought about getting some >>> of >>> the film that installers use on windows to cover my lexan skylight. Has >>> anyone tried that? >> >> Do Not Archive >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List > http://wiki.matronics.com > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 01:34:34 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" No night flying is a restriction of a Sport Pilot license, not an LSA. You can stick the needed lights on an LSA and fly it at night if you are a private pilot. -- Craig ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 02:02:41 PM PST US From: "Jim Pellien" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" What Craig says is true, but it is not a complete answer. To fly at night or in IFR conditions, you would need a fully certified engine like the Rotax 912S. The 912ULS is a non-certified engine and cannot be used for night flight or for IFR. The 912S can be used for night flight and IFR. It costs about $5K more for the certified engine (now we're up to about $18K for that engine). Also the airframe has to be certified by the manufacturer as suitable for night flight. My Czech Aircraft Works 601XL SLSA has neither the correct engine nor the airframe certification and cannot be flown IFR or at night, by anyone. Once you have the correct engine and the airframe certification from the manufacturer, then a private pilot can fly it IFR or at night if they have received the proper training and sign-offs and are current for each flight regime. A Sport Pilot can never fly at night or in IFR conditions and these limitations are absolute......they cannot be worked off with experience and training and a logbook endorsement like some of the other SP limitations like Class B,C,D airspace. Just putting on lights and having the proper radios does not certify the airframe for night flight and IFR. I have strobe lights, position lights, all of the required internal lighting, but the pilots operating handbook still says I cannot use that aircraft at night. Jim Jim Pellien Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes Sky Bryce Airport (VG18) Basye, VA www.MASPL.com 703-313-4818 -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 4:32 PM --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" No night flying is a restriction of a Sport Pilot license, not an LSA. You can stick the needed lights on an LSA and fly it at night if you are a private pilot. -- Craig ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 02:12:40 PM PST US From: "Randy L. Thwing" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: A couple of 601XL Questions --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy L. Thwing" My mistake, I used the term "Women". I meant "Wives". Women in Las Vegas are like Women everywhere else; Money talks and poor, homely clods like me walk. Do not archive. Randy L. Thwing > --> Zenith-List message posted by: > > You're in Las Vegas and you have to spend money on a hot tub to get women to disrobe? Hmmm....... something is amiss here. > > Ed Moody II > > ---- "Randy L. Thwing" wrote: > > I have never spared any expense, in any area, for any thing, that encourages women to take their clothes off. > > > > A hot tub is one of the best investments in this endeavor. > > > do not archive ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 02:30:39 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" Aren't there planes legally flying at night with the Jabiru (which doesn't have a certified version)? I believe the "no night flight" restriction on the non-certified Rotax comes from Rotax. Quoting from EAA Sport Aviation magazine (page 11, Jan 2006): "Many S-LSA are equipped with Rotax engines, whose operating instructions prohibit use at night or in IFR conditions unless it is the FAA-type-certified engine (certificated to FAR Part 33)." For that matter can't an XL with a Corvair legally fly at night? Isn't being an experimental vs. an S-LSA a factor? -- Craig ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 02:35:32 PM PST US From: "Jeff " Subject: Zenith-List: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff " Jim Pellien wrote " Once you have the correct engine and the airframe certification from the manufacturer, then a private pilot can fly it IFR or at night if they have received the proper training and sign-offs and are current for each flight regime. The following is a cut-n-paste from a posting by Pete at JabiruUSA on this issue. This is an important point for those of use with Private Certificates that want to build LSA compliant aircraft. It may be that Rotax limits the use of some models of its engines at night. "The only application of JAR22H engine certification in the USA is for Primary Category Aircraft under 750 kg. Primary category aircraft under 750 kg can use a JAR22H engine if limited to day VFR. JAR22H does not come into play in the LSA area. Engines are compliant to ASTM F2339. Jabiru engines used in experimental amateur built aircraft can be flown in any condition that the aircraft operating limitations allow, night usually being one of them. Under a LSA certificate there is no prohibition on the part of Jabiru against night operation. There is no specific prohibition in the FAR's prohibiting night flight in S-LSA aircraft. The implied restriction is in the certificate in that it is based on ASTM F2245-04. It is stated in the scope of that standard that it applies to LSA aircraft operated day VFR. To be clear - it is not the Jabiru engine that limits an aircraft to day VFR." Jeff Davidson CH601-HD ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 03:05:17 PM PST US From: "Dave" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave" Where in the FAR's does it say that! message posted by: "Jim Pellien" What Craig says is true, but it is not a complete answer. To fly at night or in IFR conditions, you would need a fully certified engine like the Rotax 912S. ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 03:05:17 PM PST US From: "B Johnson" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: "B Johnson" The part of the EAA article that applied to the Jabiru was retracted after Jabiru officials corrected them. I have not seen any retraction for the Rotax. I'll have access to an sLSA POH with the 912ULs in a week or so, I intend to give it a good read so see if I can find the night limitation... Also this would ONLY apply to sLSA, eLSA or experimental AB are not effected. -Bruce > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list- > server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne > Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 4:28 PM > To: zenith-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade > > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" > > Aren't there planes legally flying at night with the Jabiru (which doesn't > have a certified version)? I believe the "no night flight" restriction on > the non-certified Rotax comes from Rotax. Quoting from EAA Sport Aviation > magazine (page 11, Jan 2006): "Many S-LSA are equipped with Rotax engines, > whose operating instructions prohibit use at night or in IFR conditions > unless it is the FAA-type-certified engine (certificated to FAR Part 33)." > > For that matter can't an XL with a Corvair legally fly at night? Isn't > being > an experimental vs. an S-LSA a factor? > > -- Craig -- ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 03:31:01 PM PST US From: "Jim Pellien" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" Craig, You are right about ELSA's not having any type of night/IFR restrictions. The reason is that the airworthiness certificate for an ELSA lists the "builder" (on Line D) of an ELSA as the person who bought the kit and built it.....hence there is no liability (or lets say, a much reduced liability) to the manufacturer of the kit. Whereas, the manufacturer of an SLSA is listed as the "builder" on line D of the Airworthiness Certificate.....hence they are liable if something goes wrong and it is traced back to a design or fabrication fault that they caused. This is why some manufacturers put in their operating handbooks the limitations that they do....to limit their risk....and not jeopardize the "bottom line" through lawsuits. An SLSA cannot be flown legally IFR or Night, by anybody, if the pilots operating handbook (POH) says otherwise.....and in the case of SLSA's, as opposed to Part-23 certified aircraft, the handbook is self-produced by the manufacturer and must cover all of the required ASTM material in the proper formats. However, if a manufacturer wants to limit his SLSA aircraft's legal performance envelope in any way to limit his post-production liability, he can do so through the POH. Let the buyer beware. You should not purchase an SLSA without first reading the POH from cover to cover. For an ELSA, the POH, I believe, is produced by the builder, you, and it is up to you what you put into the POH. COMMENTS? Jim Jim Pellien Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes Sky Bryce Airport (VG18) Basye, VA www.MASPL.com 703-313-4818 -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 5:28 PM --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" Aren't there planes legally flying at night with the Jabiru (which doesn't have a certified version)? I believe the "no night flight" restriction on the non-certified Rotax comes from Rotax. Quoting from EAA Sport Aviation magazine (page 11, Jan 2006): "Many S-LSA are equipped with Rotax engines, whose operating instructions prohibit use at night or in IFR conditions unless it is the FAA-type-certified engine (certificated to FAR Part 33)." For that matter can't an XL with a Corvair legally fly at night? Isn't being an experimental vs. an S-LSA a factor? -- Craig ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 03:41:48 PM PST US From: "Jim Pellien" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" Jeff, I believe that any experimental aircraft that is properly equipped for night operation can be operated at night by a properly trained private pilot, unless for some unusual reason the builder of the airplane limited it to day VFR in the POH. For ELSA's, the builder determines the operating limitations. If you, as the "Builder", do not limit your aircraft to Day VFR only in the POH, then it can be flown at night with the proper lighting. Ditto for IFR, again only for private pilots properly trained and current. It works differently with SLSA's. In SLSA's the "Builder" that is listed on the airworthiness certificate Line D is the SLSA manufacturer. SLSA's are completely factory-built. Now they, the manufacturers, are in control and can, and do, limit the operation of perfectly good aircraft simply by stating so in the POH. I believe they do this to limit their risk and liability to lawsuits. If I were in their position, I'd do the same thing. For purchasers of SLSA aircraft, they need to read the POH for the specific aircraft that they are purchasing and see what limitations are included. If they do not like what they see, then they should ask the manufacturer to delete IFR/Night limitations. They may do it to make a sale, or they may not. They may do it for a higher price. Everything is negotiable. Jim Jim Pellien Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes Sky Bryce Airport (VG18) Basye, VA www.MASPL.com 703-313-4818 -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 5:34 PM --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff " Jim Pellien wrote " Once you have the correct engine and the airframe certification from the manufacturer, then a private pilot can fly it IFR or at night if they have received the proper training and sign-offs and are current for each flight regime. The following is a cut-n-paste from a posting by Pete at JabiruUSA on this issue. This is an important point for those of use with Private Certificates that want to build LSA compliant aircraft. It may be that Rotax limits the use of some models of its engines at night. "The only application of JAR22H engine certification in the USA is for Primary Category Aircraft under 750 kg. Primary category aircraft under 750 kg can use a JAR22H engine if limited to day VFR. JAR22H does not come into play in the LSA area. Engines are compliant to ASTM F2339. Jabiru engines used in experimental amateur built aircraft can be flown in any condition that the aircraft operating limitations allow, night usually being one of them. Under a LSA certificate there is no prohibition on the part of Jabiru against night operation. There is no specific prohibition in the FAR's prohibiting night flight in S-LSA aircraft. The implied restriction is in the certificate in that it is based on ASTM F2245-04. It is stated in the scope of that standard that it applies to LSA aircraft operated day VFR. To be clear - it is not the Jabiru engine that limits an aircraft to day VFR." Jeff Davidson CH601-HD ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 04:18:59 PM PST US From: Bryan Martin Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin I have the tinted canopy on my plane. I have no trouble with night flying in it. The tinting is not that dark, it's about like the windshield tint on most cars. It probably helps reduce the insolation during daylight but it still gets plenty hot in there with the canopy down and no shade. > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Bryant" > > > What about the tinted canopies some people use on the XL's...? Do > you think there'd be the same issue? I'm debating this in the back > of my mind, now, for when the time comes... > > Thanks, > > Randy > XL Wings - Plans Only > http://www.n344rb.com -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive. ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 09:22:52 PM PST US From: "Jeff " Subject: RE: Zenith-List: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff " Jim wrote: "I believe that any experimental aircraft that is properly equipped for night operation can be operated at night by a properly trained private pilot, unless for some unusual reason the builder of the airplane limited it to day VFR in the POH. For ELSA's, the builder determines the operating limitations. If you, as the "Builder", do not limit your aircraft to Day VFR only in the POH, then it can be flown at night with the proper lighting. Ditto for IFR, again only for private pilots properly trained and current." I agree. I think the only loose end here is whether any other engine manufacturer (Rotax?) puts limitations on the use of any of their engines for the same reason as above. Clearly Jabiru doesn't. The first post made it sound like there were restrictions on the 912UL. If so, a builder choosing that engine would have to include those limitations in the POH. Maybe someone out there knows the answer. Jeff Davidson ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 09:43:54 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz Hi Randy, I am afraid you suffer from a little misunderstanding. Light Sport Aircraft can fly at night or IFR if properly equiped. It is Sport Pilots or others limited to Sport Pilot privileges due to lack of a medical certificate that are limited to VFR day operations. Paul XL fuselage. do not archive At 01:14 PM 7/14/2006, you wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robert L. Stone" > >Randy, > If you are building your XL in compliance with the Light Sport > Plane criteria, you cannot fly at night so a tinted canopy would be > the way to go. That's the way I am going but I don't think a tinted > canopy is going to keep the heat out as much as a shade so I plan > to have both. I agree with the member who says it's better to use > the Van's sliding shade rather that the suction cup type for the > same reasons he stated. > >Bob Stone, Harker Heights, Tx >Building an XL >Do not Archive > > >> > > - ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 09:46:33 PM PST US From: Craig Moore Subject: RE: Zenith-List: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR --> Zenith-List message posted by: Craig Moore Jim, Maybe you saw this, maybe not. http://www.newplane.com/amd/amd/news/AMD_SLSA_IFR_CERTIFIED.htm IFR Certified 601XLi using O-200. That sounds like a great fit for flight schools, give SPL or PPL instruction during the day and be able to do night and IFR as well. And this article explains again what you have said. http://www.sportpilot.org/news/051013_ifr.html#TopOfPage Best regards, Craig Moore A&P Mancelona, MI 701 builder wannabe --- Jim Pellien wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" > > > Jeff, > > I believe that any experimental aircraft that is > properly equipped for night > operation can be operated at night by a properly > trained private pilot, > unless for some unusual reason the builder of the > airplane limited it to day > VFR in the POH. For ELSA's, the builder determines > the operating > limitations. If you, as the "Builder", do not > limit your aircraft to Day > VFR only in the POH, then it can be flown at night > with the proper lighting. > Ditto for IFR, again only for private pilots > properly trained and current. > > It works differently with SLSA's. In SLSA's the > "Builder" that is listed on > the airworthiness certificate Line D is the SLSA > manufacturer. SLSA's are > completely factory-built. Now they, the > manufacturers, are in control and > can, and do, limit the operation of perfectly good > aircraft simply by > stating so in the POH. I believe they do this to > limit their risk and > liability to lawsuits. If I were in their position, > I'd do the same thing. > For purchasers of SLSA aircraft, they need to read > the POH for the specific > aircraft that they are purchasing and see what > limitations are included. If > they do not like what they see, then they should ask > the manufacturer to > delete IFR/Night limitations. They may do it to > make a sale, or they may > not. They may do it for a higher price. Everything > is negotiable. > > Jim > > Jim Pellien > Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes > Sky Bryce Airport (VG18) > Basye, VA > www.MASPL.com > 703-313-4818 snipped __________________________________________________ ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 09:57:21 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Sun Shade --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz Hi Jim, It seems you and the other guys are all correct about the night and IFR issue. Apparently it all depends on what type of airworthiness certificate you have. As a bunch of airplane builders, I think those of us who frequent this list are most likely to wind up with E-AB or E-LSA certificates. In that case, the FAR equipment and certification requirements will rule. If I remember it all correctly, for night flight a plane must have operating position lights and (at least according to one inspector I spoke to) anti-collision strobes. For IFR, you need a reasonably full panel including some assortment of radio equipment and you need your pressure instrument system certified every two years. I guess it makes sense that S-LSA airplanes would have a different set of rules. It also seems to make sense that the POH is a medium for the manufacturer to limit his planes beyond the limits placed by the government. I don't see what the manufacturer can do to you if you fly your properly equipped S-LSA plane at night except for possibly limiting his liability should you get squashed flat. I don't think the FAA would enforce such limits that go beyond the FARs. Best regards, Paul XL fuselage do not archive At 03:26 PM 7/14/2006, you wrote: >However, if a manufacturer wants to limit his SLSA aircraft's >legal performance envelope in any way to limit his post-production >liability, he can do so through the POH. Let the buyer beware. You should >not purchase an SLSA without first reading the POH from cover to cover. For >an ELSA, the POH, I believe, is produced by the builder, you, and it is up >to you what you put into the POH. > >COMMENTS?