Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:02 AM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Steve Hulland)
2. 07:37 AM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Bill Naumuk)
3. 08:04 AM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Jim Pellien)
4. 08:48 AM - Re: Sun Shade (Jim Pellien)
5. 09:08 AM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Robert L. Stone)
6. 09:30 AM - Night VFR with a Rotax (Mark Sherman)
7. 11:49 AM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Steve Hulland)
8. 01:58 PM - Re: Re: Stopped prop in glide (FLOYD JAMISON)
9. 01:58 PM - Re: Access panel for strobe light installation (Martin Pohl)
10. 01:58 PM - Back in the saddle (Jon Croke)
11. 03:38 PM - Oil Temperature (Doug Moellering)
12. 03:44 PM - Re: Back in the saddle (Jim Pellien)
13. 03:44 PM - Re: Back in the saddle (Al Young)
14. 04:23 PM - Re: Re: Sun Shade - Night VFR (Bryan Martin)
15. 04:28 PM - Re: Back in the saddle (MaresAlf2@aol.com)
16. 04:42 PM - Re: Oil Temperature (n801bh@netzero.com)
17. 04:43 PM - Re: Re: Stopped prop in glide (James Ferris)
18. 04:48 PM - Re: Re: Stopped prop in glide (James Ferris)
19. 04:55 PM - Re: Back in the saddle (george may)
20. 05:08 PM - Life Affirming (Jim Pellien)
21. 05:08 PM - Re: Oil Temperature (dfmoeller)
22. 06:25 PM - Re: Back in the saddle (John Bolding)
23. 06:29 PM - Re: Re: Stopped prop in glide (Bryan Martin)
24. 06:38 PM - Re: Back in the saddle (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F3hann_Gestur?=)
25. 07:19 PM - Night VFR (Tom and Bren Henderson)
26. 07:44 PM - 701 Jury Strut question (Zed Smith)
27. 08:33 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Tebenkof@aol.com)
28. 08:33 PM - Question about XL lower nose gear support bolts (deglass1@aol.com)
29. 09:00 PM - Re: 701 Jury Strut question (Ashcraft, Keith -AES)
30. 09:00 PM - Drag of a windmilling propellor (George Swinford)
31. 09:34 PM - Airplane insurance. (Paul Mulwitz)
32. 09:34 PM - Re: Sun Shade (Bryan Martin)
33. 09:44 PM - Re: Back in the saddle Seat Belt Attachments. (Gary Gower)
34. 09:59 PM - Re: 701 Jury Strut question (NYTerminat@aol.com)
35. 10:23 PM - Re: Drag of a windmilling propellor (Gary Gower)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR |
My 600 Taildragger will be certified as expirmental and can be flown at
night. Any sport pilot can fly it within Sport Pilot rules as it will have a
gross weight of 1,100 pounds or so. It has a Cont. A65 for power. Should
receive the registration this month, DAR next month and then flying in late
August or early September. Goal is to fly it to the EAA Fly In in Casa
Grande.
--
Semper Fi,
Steven R. Hulland
CH 600 Taildragger
Amado, AZ
This and all other incoming/outgoing email, attachments and replies scanned
prior to opening/sending and uses an external firewall to help insure virus
free email and attachments.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR |
Steve-
If I knew for sure, I wouldn't ask. Is the A65 the 65hp Cub engine?
New signature attached per lister's post request.
Bill Naumuk
40%HDS being relocated to new shop
Townville, Pa
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Hulland
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 8:53 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR
My 600 Taildragger will be certified as expirmental and can be flown
at night. Any sport pilot can fly it within Sport Pilot rules as it will
have a gross weight of 1,100 pounds or so. It has a Cont. A65 for power.
Should receive the registration this month, DAR next month and then
flying in late August or early September. Goal is to fly it to the EAA
Fly In in Casa Grande.
--
Semper Fi,
Steven R. Hulland
CH 600 Taildragger
Amado, AZ
This and all other incoming/outgoing email, attachments and replies
scanned prior to opening/sending and uses an external firewall to help
insure virus free email and attachments.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
Jeff,
I think you are right. If the manufacturer of a major manufacturer
subsystem like an engine, puts a limitation on the use of that engine, then
the experimental builder would probably have to follow that engine
manufacturer's limitation.
We need a person with a handle on the FAR's to straighten this one out...it
is a great question.
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: Saturday, July 15, 2006 12:14 AM
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff " <jeffrey_davidson@earthlink.net>
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 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
Paul,
Yes. It all comes down to liability in case something goes wrong and the
lawyers get involved.
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 Paul Mulwitz
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 12:52 AM
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
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?
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR |
Members,
I am very much surprised that my original message shown below in
blue would cause such a lengthy discussion
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.
I guess what I should have said is if your rating is Sport Pilot,
you cannot fly at night but if you hold a regular pilots license Your
medical is up to date and your aircraft is properly equiped for night
flying then you may do so. I have had a regular pilots license for a
little over 30 years and would be able to fly a properly equiped
experemental at night until my current physical runs out and I do not
intend to get another flight physical. I will just keep my drivers
license up to date and fly a sport plane during daylight hours only. I
never did like to fly at night anyway the black hole down below scares
the hell out of me. The few times I have flown at night I sit there
cruising along and wonder how I am going to find a suitable place to
land if the engine quits. As far as I am concerned night and instrument
flying are for the professionals who have to do it. I am 100% retired
and I don't have to do anything but die, pay taxes, and honey-do chores.
Bob Stone, Harker Heights, Tx
ZodiacXL (Just started)
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 9:59 AM
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
>
> Jeff,
>
> I think you are right. If the manufacturer of a major manufacturer
> subsystem like an engine, puts a limitation on the use of that engine,
then
> the experimental builder would probably have to follow that engine
> manufacturer's limitation.
>
> We need a person with a handle on the FAR's to straighten this one
out...it
> is a great question.
>
> 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: Saturday, July 15, 2006 12:14 AM
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff "
<jeffrey_davidson@earthlink.net>
>
>
> 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 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Night VFR with a Rotax |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Mark Sherman <msherman95632@yahoo.com>
Good Saturday morning to all.
This no night vfr with a Rotax thing kind of took me
by surprise. I have just shot off an e-mail to the
EAA with the question of, does the FAA restrict the
aircraft from night vfr just because a part used on
the aircraft is not recommended for night vfr?
Specifically the engine.
I will let you all know what I here.
Mark S.
701/912ULS
California
do not archive
__________________________________________________
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR |
Bill,
Yep, the same engine was on Champs, Piper Cubs, Taylor Crafts and many more.
I can fly at night with the airplane being expirmental, but will only fly
daylight.
--
Semper Fi,
Steven R. Hulland
CH 600 Taildragger
Amado, AZ
This and all other incoming/outgoing email, attachments and replies scanned
prior to opening/sending and uses an external firewall to help insure virus
free email and attachments.
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Stopped prop in glide |
It is accurate to talk about the larger drag in a rotating prop since
the drag is effectively the size of the rotating prop disc.
My examiner demonstrated this to me during my flight exam in 1970, quite
effectively. We were at 3,500 ft when he pulled the throttle and said
okay, your engine has quit, etc. In the process of spiraling down he
starting talking about this effect and then demonstrated it by shutting
down the engine. As soon as the prop stopped the drag reduction was
evident.
I have since demonstrated the exact same effect many times since. It is
a fact, the frontal area of the stopped prop in less than the drag disc
of a windmilling prop, however illogical it may seem to the casual
observer.
Floyd
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Access panel for strobe light installation |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Martin Pohl" <mpohl@pohltec.ch>
Thx for all your answers!
With the access panel in the aluminium part of the wing tip, did you install the
strobe-generator at the backside of the spar?
Martin
--------
Martin Pohl
Zodiac XL QBK
8645 Jona, Switzerland
www.pohltec.ch/ZodiacXL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=47453#47453
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Back in the saddle |
It is time for me to come out from hiding... My body has repaired
itself to the point I can function quite normally (off the crutches!)
and so I want to share some pictures of a rugged plane that has been
thru a 'fender bender' of sorts. And time to thank the many whose words
and acts of support and kindness make getting back to normal possible..!
On June 27, coming in for a landing to my backyard strip, I am told I
clipped a tree limb with my newly rebuilt 701. This apparently spun the
plane down to the ground where they found me, sitting on the wing, in a
daze. I have no recollection of landing that day... so I have no
knowledge of what happened and why - other than what others believe
happened (and I dont doubt their conjectures). Why did I come close to
the tree limb? I usually steer way clear of those... I have landed
hundreds of times in my field (tho not with the 701, only a dozen times
with it) and have never had an issue with the trees. So I plead
ignorance... having nothing to learn from this experience, nothing to
share about it... and may never learn any pertinent details. My
injuries amounted to a hurt leg (but not broken) that gets better every
day... 40 stitches on my throat (from hitting the dash?, maybe the
stick?, the right seat belt attachment came off the center tunnel
structure) a small puncture in my knee (stick?) and some small marks on
the side of my head from the headset band digging in a little too deep
(this was the head trauma, I guess, that caused the loss of memory?) I
had enough awareness to climb out of the plane and call help to a nearby
friend, but no memory since taking off.
Pretty strange to wake up in an ambulance and learn that your new plane
is crashed.... and never to learn why I hit the trees...! Strange
indeed! The local TV news services had a field day... they monitor 911
and it was on the news and in print for days.... and of course my
wonderful neighbor felt compelled to tell those reporters of my prior
follies with the trees so this turned into a real story for them.
(neighbors: cant live with them, cant live w/o them!) And although this
mishap was not equipment related (will call this pilot error - of some
sort!) it had no relationship to the prior mishap (definitely equipment:
spring tampering!) - but you wont hear that from the neighbor or news
people.... guess I'm just feeling funny from having it happen twice --
oh well!
Heading to a Rotax surgeon on Tuesday to examine the 912 gearbox and
crank for damage... keeping my fingers crossed.
I have pictures at www.JonCroke.com Click on the first 701 picture to
see the crash photos!
Thanks again to everyone on the list for their support! I already have
a stack of reusable parts for the rebuild... ! Reminds me of groundhog
day, the movie...
Jon
the definitive aluminum butcher from Brussels, WI
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Doug Moellering" <dfmoeller@austin.rr.com>
I was trying to get some flying in today on my new toy, a 601XL with rotax
912 ULS, but discovered an issue. The oil temperature wanted to go out of
spec. I assumed the maybe I've got some blockage to the cooler, but also
noticed that the cooler seems VERY small. I bought this one with 62 hours
on it and I'm sure this is the standard cooler in the firewall forward kit.
Has anyone heard of any oil temp problems?
Doug
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Back in the saddle |
Jon,
Reading you message, I couldn't help but admire you and your love of
aviation. To go through what you have, and just get "back in the saddle" is
truly remarkable. Thanks for loving aviation and light sport aircraft the
way you do..your note made my day.
Thanks,
Jim
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes
Sky Bryce Airport (VG18)
Basye, VA
www.MASPL.com
703-313-4818
_____
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jon Croke
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 4:53 PM
It is time for me to come out from hiding... My body has repaired itself to
the point I can function quite normally (off the crutches!) and so I want
to share some pictures of a rugged plane that has been thru a 'fender
bender' of sorts. And time to thank the many whose words and acts of
support and kindness make getting back to normal possible..!
On June 27, coming in for a landing to my backyard strip, I am told I
clipped a tree limb with my newly rebuilt 701. This apparently spun the
plane down to the ground where they found me, sitting on the wing, in a
daze. I have no recollection of landing that day... so I have no knowledge
of what happened and why - other than what others believe happened (and I
dont doubt their conjectures). Why did I come close to the tree limb? I
usually steer way clear of those... I have landed hundreds of times in my
field (tho not with the 701, only a dozen times with it) and have never had
an issue with the trees. So I plead ignorance... having nothing to learn
from this experience, nothing to share about it... and may never learn any
pertinent details. My injuries amounted to a hurt leg (but not broken) that
gets better every day... 40 stitches on my throat (from hitting the dash?,
maybe the stick?, the right seat belt attachment came off the center tunnel
structure) a small puncture in my knee (stick?) and some small marks on the
side of my head from the headset band digging in a little too deep (this was
the head trauma, I guess, that caused the loss of memory?) I had enough
awareness to climb out of the plane and call help to a nearby friend, but no
memory since taking off.
Pretty strange to wake up in an ambulance and learn that your new plane is
crashed.... and never to learn why I hit the trees...! Strange indeed! The
local TV news services had a field day... they monitor 911 and it was on the
news and in print for days.... and of course my wonderful neighbor felt
compelled to tell those reporters of my prior follies with the trees so this
turned into a real story for them. (neighbors: cant live with them, cant
live w/o them!) And although this mishap was not equipment related (will
call this pilot error - of some sort!) it had no relationship to the prior
mishap (definitely equipment: spring tampering!) - but you wont hear that
from the neighbor or news people.... guess I'm just feeling funny from
having it happen twice -- oh well!
Heading to a Rotax surgeon on Tuesday to examine the 912 gearbox and crank
for damage... keeping my fingers crossed.
I have pictures at www.JonCroke.com Click on the first 701 picture to see
the crash photos!
Thanks again to everyone on the list for their support! I already have a
stack of reusable parts for the rebuild... ! Reminds me of groundhog day,
the movie...
Jon
the definitive aluminum butcher from Brussels, WI
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Back in the saddle |
Jon- So glad you are on the mends!! You and I seem to be in some
contest for the "Best crash landing of the year award" Last may (05) I
nosed into a concrete runway on my XLs third flight. I am finishing
repairs this week. Last friday, I had just finished my Bi-annual flight
review. (Three hours in a 172 without a break, doing stuff I had never
dreamed you could do in a 172) and was on my way home to a grass strip
where the 172 lived. No wind, hot day, came in a little high, so I
dumped the flaps and decided I was set up for a practice short field
landing over an obstical. I had just practiced the same landing with a
CFI less than a hour earlier. Bounced, tried to recover with a little
power and yoke back, but the plane nosed into the turf bounced again,
and the left wing hit the tops of the corn bordering the field. The
plane veered to the left, skidded, the nose wheel broke off, the right
wing scraped the ground and dug in throwing me against the passenger
side window, which stopped my head and broke, throwing my glasses in
three pieces 10' into the corn, along with the headset. The planes
owner witnessed the entire incident, and called 911. From then on, my
story is your story. Ambulance, Sheriff, etc etc. With the exception
of head lacerations, broken nose, blood everywhere, and a huge knot, I
was A-OK. The plane, totaled. Of interest here is the fact that after
all the hullablu was over, we found that besides pilot error, the
fuselage had buckled on the first bounce, behind the rear window, on the
underside, stretching the cables to the rudder and elevator to the point
that they were useless. After the first bounce, I was along for the
ride with no control. It would probably been no more than a lousy
landing if the buckeling hadn't occurred. If I had tried to go around,
I wouldn't be here I'm sure.
Sincerely though- I wish you the best in your re-build. If there is
anything I can do to help, call me.
Regards,
Al Young
----- Original Message -----
From: Jon Croke
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 3:53 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Back in the saddle
It is time for me to come out from hiding... My body has repaired
itself to the point I can function quite normally (off the crutches!)
and so I want to share some pictures of a rugged plane that has been
thru a 'fender bender' of sorts. And time to thank the many whose words
and acts of support and kindness make getting back to normal possible..!
On June 27, coming in for a landing to my backyard strip, I am told I
clipped a tree limb with my newly rebuilt 701. This apparently spun the
plane down to the ground where they found me, sitting on the wing, in a
daze. I have no recollection of landing that day... so I have no
knowledge of what happened and why - other than what others believe
happened (and I dont doubt their conjectures). Why did I come close to
the tree limb? I usually steer way clear of those... I have landed
hundreds of times in my field (tho not with the 701, only a dozen times
with it) and have never had an issue with the trees. So I plead
ignorance... having nothing to learn from this experience, nothing to
share about it... and may never learn any pertinent details. My
injuries amounted to a hurt leg (but not broken) that gets better every
day... 40 stitches on my throat (from hitting the dash?, maybe the
stick?, the right seat belt attachment came off the center tunnel
structure) a small puncture in my knee (stick?) and some small marks on
the side of my head from the headset band digging in a little too deep
(this was the head trauma, I guess, that caused the loss of memory?) I
had enough awareness to climb out of the plane and call help to a nearby
friend, but no memory since taking off.
Pretty strange to wake up in an ambulance and learn that your new
plane is crashed.... and never to learn why I hit the trees...! Strange
indeed! The local TV news services had a field day... they monitor 911
and it was on the news and in print for days.... and of course my
wonderful neighbor felt compelled to tell those reporters of my prior
follies with the trees so this turned into a real story for them.
(neighbors: cant live with them, cant live w/o them!) And although this
mishap was not equipment related (will call this pilot error - of some
sort!) it had no relationship to the prior mishap (definitely equipment:
spring tampering!) - but you wont hear that from the neighbor or news
people.... guess I'm just feeling funny from having it happen twice --
oh well!
Heading to a Rotax surgeon on Tuesday to examine the 912 gearbox and
crank for damage... keeping my fingers crossed.
I have pictures at www.JonCroke.com Click on the first 701 picture
to see the crash photos!
Thanks again to everyone on the list for their support! I already
have a stack of reusable parts for the rebuild... ! Reminds me of
groundhog day, the movie...
Jon
the definitive aluminum butcher from Brussels, WI
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Sun Shade - Night VFR |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
The engine manufacturers recommendations are irrelevant to an
experimental amateur built aircraft. As long as tthe proper equipment
is installed and the pilot has the proper qualifications, the plane
can be flown at night or IFR. The same seems to be true for E-LSAs.
The only such restrictions that I have been able to find only mention
S-LSA aircraft.
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" <jim@pellien.com>
>
> Jeff,
>
> I think you are right. If the manufacturer of a major manufacturer
> subsystem like an engine, puts a limitation on the use of that
> engine, then
> the experimental builder would probably have to follow that engine
> manufacturer's limitation.
>
> We need a person with a handle on the FAR's to straighten this one
> out...it
> is a great question.
>
> Jim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 12:14 AM
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff "
> <jeffrey_davidson@earthlink.net>
>
>> 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
>>
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Back in the saddle |
hi Jon: Impressed on the "folding " metal in the crash pictures. Some
of it appears to have been designed to absorb energy. "when " you
rebuild Please drop a line on the engineering for reinforcements you will
now
doubt incorporate .. I am finishing a 1/2 built 701 and am at the cowl
- dash - firewall stage and see things that could be stronger
---but not tooo strong !!! Good luck on the sudden stoppage of the
912
It looks rugged from the pictures but a good magna-flux is on order !
Lots of patience on the body recovery Alf Peterson Venice Calif &
Woodland park Colorado
_maresalf2@aol.com_
(mailto:maresalf2@aol.com)
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Oil Temperature |
What is the temp ??? I am about to head to OSH in my "beast" but my fue
l stop is in SD and 110 f field temp is kinda harsh......
do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
-- "Doug Moellering" <dfmoeller@austin.rr.com> wrote:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Doug Moellering" <dfmoeller@austin.r
r.com>
I was trying to get some flying in today on my new toy, a 601XL with rot
ax
912 ULS, but discovered an issue. The oil temperature wanted to go out
of
spec. I assumed the maybe I've got some blockage to the cooler, but als
o
noticed that the cooler seems VERY small. I bought this one with 62 hou
rs
on it and I'm sure this is the standard cooler in the firewall forward k
it.
Has anyone heard of any oil temp problems?
Doug
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
<html><P>What is the temp ??? I am about to head to OSH in my "bea
st" but my fuel stop is in SD and 110 f field temp is kinda harsh.
.....</P>
<P>do not archive<BR><BR><BR>Ben Haas<BR>N801BH<BR>www.haaspowerair
.com<BR><BR>-- "Doug Moellering" <dfmoeller@austin.rr.
com> wrote:<BR>--> Zenith-List message posted&
nbsp;by: "Doug Moellering" <dfmoeller@austin.rr.com>
;<BR><BR>I was trying to get some flying&n
bsp;in today on my new toy, a 601XL&n
bsp;with rotax <BR>912 ULS, but discovered 
;an issue. The oil temperature wanted&nbs
p;to go out of <BR>spec. I assumed&n
bsp;the maybe I've got some blockage to&nb
sp;the cooler, but also <BR>noticed that t
he cooler seems VERY small. I bought
this one with 62 hours <BR>on it&nbs
p;and I'm sure this is the standard c
ooler in the firewall forward kit. <BR>Has
anyone heard of any oil temp problem
========================
========================
p;Use the Matronics List Features Navigator&nbs
hive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse,
========================
sp; -&n
sp;out the All New Matronics Email List&nb
nbsp; &
nbsp; &
nbsp; &
========================
========================
- List Contribution&
p; &nbs
p; &nbs
========================
========================
=====<BR><BR><BR><BR> <BR> <BR> <BR></P></html>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Stopped prop in glide |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: James Ferris <mijniljj@yahoo.com>
"the drag is effectively the size of the rotating prop
disc" Give me a break! that is 30 square feet compared
to about 2 to 3 square feet of the stoped prop? Surely
you don't think the drag is ten times as much when the
prop is just turning over the engine as the drag of
the prop when it is stoped. Maybe two tines as much
but not ten times as much.
Jim
--- FLOYD JAMISON <fhjamison@verizon.net> wrote:
> It is accurate to talk about the larger drag in a
> rotating prop since the drag is effectively the size
> of the rotating prop disc.
>
> My examiner demonstrated this to me during my flight
> exam in 1970, quite effectively. We were at 3,500
> ft when he pulled the throttle and said okay, your
> engine has quit, etc. In the process of spiraling
> down he starting talking about this effect and then
> demonstrated it by shutting down the engine. As
> soon as the prop stopped the drag reduction was
> evident.
>
> I have since demonstrated the exact same effect many
> times since. It is a fact, the frontal area of the
> stopped prop in less than the drag disc of a
> windmilling prop, however illogical it may seem to
> the casual observer.
>
> Floyd
__________________________________________________
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Stopped prop in glide |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: James Ferris <mijniljj@yahoo.com>
"the drag is effectively the size of the rotating prop
disc" Give me a break! that is 30 square feet compared
to about 2 to 3 square feet of the stoped prop? Surely
you don't think the drag is ten times as much when the
prop is just turning over the engine as the drag of
the prop when it is stoped. Maybe two tines as much
but not ten times as much.
Jim
--- FLOYD JAMISON <fhjamison@verizon.net> wrote:
> It is accurate to talk about the larger drag in a
> rotating prop since the drag is effectively the size
> of the rotating prop disc.
>
> My examiner demonstrated this to me during my flight
> exam in 1970, quite effectively. We were at 3,500
> ft when he pulled the throttle and said okay, your
> engine has quit, etc. In the process of spiraling
> down he starting talking about this effect and then
> demonstrated it by shutting down the engine. As
> soon as the prop stopped the drag reduction was
> evident.
>
> I have since demonstrated the exact same effect many
> times since. It is a fact, the frontal area of the
> stopped prop in less than the drag disc of a
> windmilling prop, however illogical it may seem to
> the casual observer.
>
> Floyd
__________________________________________________
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Back in the saddle |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "george may" <gfmjr_20@hotmail.com>
Jon--
Welcome back! You're one tough guy. Will look forward to your third
first flight.
George May
601XL 912s
do not archive
_________________________________________________________________
Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
This one really got to me. It is touching.
Jim
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes
Sky Bryce Airport (VG18)
Basye, VA
www.MASPL.com
703-313-4818
What would you do? You make the choice! Don't look for a punch line; There
isn't one! Read it anyway. My question to all of you is: Would you have made
the same choice?
At a fundraising dinner for a school that serves learning disabled children,
the father of one of the students delivered a speech that would never be
forgotten by all who attended. After extolling the school and its dedicated
staff, he offered a question:< FONT face=Arial size=2>
"When not interfered with by outside influences, everything nature does is
done with perfection. Yet my son, Shay, cannot learn things as other
children do. He cannot understand things as other children do. Where is the
natural order of things in my son?"
The audience was stilled by the query.
The father continued. "I believe, that when a child like Shay, physically
and mentally handicapped comes into the world, an opportunity to realize
true human nature presents its elf, and it comes, in the way other people
treat that child. "Then he told the following story:
Shay and his father had walked past a park where some boys Shay knew were
playing baseball. Shay asked," Do you think they'll let me play?" Shay's
father knew that most of the boys would not want someone like Shay on their
team, but the father also understood that if his son were allowed to play,
it would give him a much-needed sense of belonging and some confidence to be
accepted by others in spite of his handicaps.
Shay's father approac hed one of the boys on the field and asked if Shay
could play, not expecting much. The boy looked around for guidance and said,
"We're losing by six runs and the game is in the eighth inning. I guess he
can be on our team and we'll try to put him in to bat in the ninth inning."
Shay struggled over to the team's bench put on a team shirt with a broad
smile and his Father had a small tear in his eye and warmth in his heart.
The boys saw the father's joy at his son being accepted. In the bottom of
the eighth inning, Shay's team scored a few runs but was still behind by
three. In the top of the ninth inning, Shay put on a glove and played in the
right field. Even though no hits came his way, he was obviously ecstatic
just to be in the game and on the field, gri nning from ear to ear as his
father waved to him from the stands. In the bottom of the ninth inning,
Shay's team scored again. Now, with two outs and the bases loaded, the
potential winning run was on base and Shay was scheduled to be next at bat.
At this juncture, do they let Shay bat and give away their chance to win the
game? Surprisingly, Shay was given the bat. Everyone knew that a hit was all
but impossible 'cause Shay didn't even know how to hold the bat properly,
much less connect with the ball.
However, as Shay stepped up t o the plate, the pitcher, recognizing the
other team putting winning aside for this moment in Shay's life, moved in a
few steps to lob the ball in softly so Shay could at least be able to make
contact. The first pitch came and Shay swung clumsily and missed. The
pitcher again took a few steps forward to toss the ball softly towards Shay.
As the pitch came in, Shay swung at the ball and hit a slow ground ball
right back to the pitcher.
The game would now be over, but the pitcher picked up the soft grounder and
could have easily thrown the ball to the first baseman. Shay would have been
out and that would have been the end of the game.
Instead, the pitcher threw the ball right over the head of the first
baseman, out of reach of all team mates. Everyone from the stands and both
teams started yelling, "Shay, run to first! Run to first!" Never in his life
had Shay ever ran that far but made it to first base. He scampered down the
baseline, wide-eyed and startled.
Everyone yelled, "Run to second, run to second!"
Catching his breath, Shay awkwardly ran towards second, gleaming and
struggling to make it to second base. By the time Shay rounded t owards
second base, the right fielder had the ball, the smallest guy on their
team, who had a chance to be the hero for his team for the firs t time. He
could have thrown the ball to the second-baseman for the tag, but he
understood the pitcher's intentions and he too intentionally threw the ball
high and far over the third-baseman's head. Shay ran toward third base
deliriously as the runners ahead of him circled the bases toward home.
All were screaming, "Shay, Shay, Shay, all the Way Shay"
Shay reached third base, the opposing shortstop ran to help him and turned
him in the direction of third base, and shouted, "Run to third! Shay, run to
third" As Shay rounded third, t he boys from both teams and those watching
were on their feet were screaming, "Shay, run home! Shay ran to home,
stepped on the plate, and was cheered as the hero who hit the "grand slam"
and won the game for his team.
That day, said the father softly with tears now rolling down his face, the
boys from both teams helped bring a piece of true love and humanity into
this world.
Shay didn't ma ke it to another summer and died that winter, having never
forgotten being the hero and making his Father so happy and coming home and
seeing his Mother tearfully embrace her little hero of the day!
AND, NOW A LITTLE FOOTNOTE TO THIS STORY: We all send thousands of jokes
through the e-mail without a second thought, but when it comes to sending
messages about life choices, people think twice about sharing. The crude,
vulgar, and often obscene pass freely through cyberspace, but public
discussion about decency is too often suppressed in our schools and
workplaces.
If you're thinking about forwarding this message, chances are that you're
probably sorting out the people on your address list that aren't the
"appropriate" ones to receive this type of message. Well, the person who
sent you this believes that we all can make a difference. We all have
thousands of opportunities every single day to help realize the "natural
order of things." So many seemingly trivial interactions between two people
present us with a choice: Do we pass along a little spark of love and
humanity or do we pass up that opportunity to brighten the day of those with
us the least able, and leave the world a little bit colder in the process?
A wise man once said every society is judged by how it treats it's least
fortunate amongst them.
You now have two choices:
1. Delete
2. Forward
May your day, be a Shay Day, sunny today tomorrow & always!
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Oil Temperature |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "dfmoeller" <dfmoeller@austin.rr.com>
I was sitting on 265 and headed UP.
Doug
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=47489#47489
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Back in the saddle |
Jon wrote,
the right seat belt attachment came off the center tunnel structure)
I ASSUME (a dangerous thing to do) that everyone will want to chase
this rabbit until a solution is offered.
I have always felt that compared to other designs, namely those that I
have built or worked on, the restraint hardware on the 701 is on the
light side.
PLEASE don't think that I'm trying to second guess Chris here, maybe
the attach fitting failed just when and how it was designed (everything
has a limit) but I would rather have a harness that stays where it's
bolted, keeping me out of the inst panel. I realize there are a host of
design considerations here. I also suspect that if there had been a
passenger there would have been a lot more load in the center attach
area and the POSSIBILITY of failure with less restraint than it offered
Jon in this case while solo.
Anyone else having heartburn over this one?
Jon, THANKS for your being so open with your experiences , it's
helping us all build and fly better and safer. LOW&SLOW John
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Stopped prop in glide |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
The higher drag of a spinning has a lot more to do with the fact that it
is moving faster than a stopped prop than it does with the area of the
prop disk. Drag is a function of speed, among other things.
James Ferris wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: James Ferris <mijniljj@yahoo.com>
>
> "the drag is effectively the size of the rotating prop
> disc" Give me a break! that is 30 square feet compared
> to about 2 to 3 square feet of the stoped prop? Surely
> you don't think the drag is ten times as much when the
> prop is just turning over the engine as the drag of
> the prop when it is stoped. Maybe two tines as much
> but not ten times as much.
> Jim
>
> --- FLOYD JAMISON <fhjamison@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> It is accurate to talk about the larger drag in a
>> rotating prop since the drag is effectively the size
>> of the rotating prop disc.
>>
>> My examiner demonstrated this to me during my flight
>> exam in 1970, quite effectively. We were at 3,500
>> ft when he pulled the throttle and said okay, your
>> engine has quit, etc. In the process of spiraling
>> down he starting talking about this effect and then
>> demonstrated it by shutting down the engine. As
>> soon as the prop stopped the drag reduction was
>> evident.
>>
>> I have since demonstrated the exact same effect many
>> times since. It is a fact, the frontal area of the
>> stopped prop in less than the drag disc of a
>> windmilling prop, however illogical it may seem to
>> the casual observer.
>>
>> Floyd
>
>
Bryan Martin
do not archive
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Back in the saddle |
Hello Jon.
So good to hear from you again and that you are getting strong again
after your mishap. You are an inspiration to us all who have only built
one Zenith aircraft and just barely made it. To start again for the
third time is something I think needs a very strong willpower and
eagerness to fly again. I wish you all the best with your next project
and hope the phrase " three is a charm" will be yours when you fly again.
Best wishes,
Johann G.
Iceland.
Joeing 701.
do not archive
Jon Croke wrote:
>
> It is time for me to come out from hiding... My body has repaired
> itself to the point I can function quite normally (off the crutches!)
> and so I want to share some pictures of a rugged plane that has been
> thru a 'fender bender' of sorts. And time to thank the many whose
> words and acts of support and kindness make getting back to normal
> possible..!
>
> On June 27, coming in for a landing to my backyard strip, I am told I
> clipped a tree limb with my newly rebuilt 701. This apparently spun
> the plane down to the ground where they found me, sitting on the wing,
> in a daze. I have no recollection of landing that day... so I have no
> knowledge of what happened and why - other than what others believe
> happened (and I dont doubt their conjectures). Why did I come close
> to the tree limb? I usually steer way clear of those... I have landed
> hundreds of times in my field (tho not with the 701, only a dozen
> times with it) and have never had an issue with the trees. So I plead
> ignorance... having nothing to learn from this experience, nothing to
> share about it... and may never learn any pertinent details. My
> injuries amounted to a hurt leg (but not broken) that gets better
> every day... 40 stitches on my throat (from hitting the dash?, maybe
> the stick?, the right seat belt attachment came off the center tunnel
> structure) a small puncture in my knee (stick?) and some small marks
> on the side of my head from the headset band digging in a little too
> deep (this was the head trauma, I guess, that caused the loss of
> memory?) I had enough awareness to climb out of the plane and call
> help to a nearby friend, but no memory since taking off.
>
> Pretty strange to wake up in an ambulance and learn that your new
> plane is crashed.... and never to learn why I hit the trees...!
> Strange indeed! The local TV news services had a field day... they
> monitor 911 and it was on the news and in print for days.... and of
> course my wonderful neighbor felt compelled to tell those reporters of
> my prior follies with the trees so this turned into a real story for
> them. (neighbors: cant live with them, cant live w/o them!) And
> although this mishap was not equipment related (will call this pilot
> error - of some sort!) it had no relationship to the prior mishap
> (definitely equipment: spring tampering!) - but you wont hear that
> from the neighbor or news people.... guess I'm just feeling funny from
> having it happen twice -- oh well!
>
> Heading to a Rotax surgeon on Tuesday to examine the 912 gearbox and
> crank for damage... keeping my fingers crossed.
>
> I have pictures at www.JonCroke.com <http://www.JonCroke.com> Click
> on the first 701 picture to see the crash photos!
>
> Thanks again to everyone on the list for their support! I already
> have a stack of reusable parts for the rebuild... ! Reminds me of
> groundhog day, the movie...
>
> Jon
> the definitive aluminum butcher from Brussels, WI
>
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
AMEN! I've been biting my tongue on this issue, not wanting to answer the
twenty or so follow up replies telling me I didn't have a clue. There's a BIG
difference between S-LSA and E-LSA that many seem to be blissfully ignorant
of. We've had quite a few posts along the lines of, "No! No night VFR, at least
I think that's right..." There's no shame in not knowing something, only
in pretending to know! : )
It's surprising how many people replied without so much as checking the EAA
or AOPA web sites, where the issue is fairly pointedly laid out. We're building
experimental aircraft. The minute I dig into a Rotax engine, they don't
want to hear from me again. It has just become an experimental engine. No, they
won't certify it for night VFR. But neither will the manufacturers of ANYTHING
else I've installed myself on my aircraft.
Anyway, don't take my word for it, I wouldn't take yours. At least not without
checking with a few reputable sources. Happy flying (at night too)!
Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net> wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by:
Bryan Martin
The engine manufacturers recommendations are irrelevant to an
experimental amateur built aircraft. As long as tthe proper equipment
is installed and the pilot has the proper qualifications, the plane
can be flown at night or IFR. The same seems to be true for E-LSAs.
The only such restrictions that I have been able to find only mention
S-LSA aircraft.
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien"
>
> Jeff,
>
> I think you are right. If the manufacturer of a major manufacturer
> subsystem like an engine, puts a limitation on the use of that
> engine, then
> the experimental builder would probably have to follow that engine
> manufacturer's limitation.
>
> We need a person with a handle on the FAR's to straighten this one
> out...it
> is a great question.
>
> Jim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 12:14 AM
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff "
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 701 Jury Strut question |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
List,
First of all, my ZAC drawings are 4th Edition, 06/2001 (the first CAD version).
The "Assembly Manual" is the old typewriter/hand-drawn version.
My drawings show the "one-piece" wing struts. I have the earlier two-piece struts
supplied with the kit. So far, no problem...wings are mounted and conform
to all the ZAC specs as to left,right, etc.
Assembly manual shows the older method of just bending .500 x .035 tubing around
the struts and riveting it to add the JURY Struts.
Drawings (CAD version) shows the four different lengths of tubing required on each
wing (tubing was with my kit) but these 7V10-3SP Jury Struts attach to the
7V10-1SP struts via 7V10-5SP and -6SP Jury Strut Brackets. (Not in my kit, no
problem....easy to make, the drawings indicate 4130 material, .049 thick).
What is confusing is the drawing showing "detail" of the Jury Strut Brackets, with
Jury Struts, attached to the Wing Strut on Sheet 7V10. The Jury Struts appear
to have been "swedged" on the ends....and there is "cross-hatching" drawn
in the last 20 or 30 mm of the ends of each Jury Strut. What is the deal?
Last item on Page 7V10 is a "Jury Strut Cap" (7V10-7SP).
Best guess is that this is 1/2" wide x 1/4" thick aluminum bar. (It is shown as
12 mm wide x .250" thick, 21 & 40 mm lengths needed)
Is this 7V10-7SP "cap" just stuck into the ends of the 1/2" jury tubing and then
flattened with a hammer? Then drill through this for an AN3 bolt? Surely this
can't be! Okay, so it is....then the proper name for the item would be Jury
Strut Insert.
Appreciate any photos or comments, directions, corrections, or hammer instructions.
Thanks and best regards.....105 degrees today. Paint dries REAL fast in this
weather.
Zed/701/R912/still diddling
do not archive
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
One consideration I have not seen mentioned in the debate about night flight
with a Rotax: The FAA may or may not care, in an experimental amateur built
aircraft, whether Rotax gives you permission to fly at night with their
engine. But it seems to me your insurance company might, in case you care about
such things. I bend my airplane in an engine-out night landing and I would
expect the insurance company to point out to me that Rotax says no night
flight, and they (the insurance company) would say "tough luck". Maybe this is
not right. Any thoughts?
Jim Greenough
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Question about XL lower nose gear support bolts |
This might be obvious, but is an unusual design practice -
The 4 bolts AN4H-5A that mount the lower nose gear bearing support 6B8-9 to the
nylon bearing appear to require a blind, threaded hole into the nylon block,
then they're safety wired to prevent backout. The bolt length appears to support
this, but depending on threaded plastic for pullout strength doesn't sound
like good practice without an anchor insert.
Please advise - are these bolts just threaded into the nylon, and is this OK since
there won't be any (or not much) pullout force or shock?
Thanks for all the help this list gives all of us!
David Glass
Forest (near Lynchburg), VA
N253DG reserved
XL fuse, finally finishing the airframe
________________________________________________________________________
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 701 Jury Strut question |
Diddling Zed,
That is the way I also interpret it. I have seen a hardwood used, (not
on a Zenith) but I was going to use solid Aluminum for mine.
I am also still waiting to buy some more Aluminum to pound on!!
Keith
N 38.9947
W 105.1305
Alt. 9,100'
*************************************************************************
*******
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sat 7/15/2006 8:39 PM
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
List,
First of all, my ZAC drawings are 4th Edition, 06/2001 (the first CAD
version). The "Assembly Manual" is the old typewriter/hand-drawn
version.
My drawings show the "one-piece" wing struts. I have the earlier
two-piece struts supplied with the kit. So far, no problem...wings are
mounted and conform to all the ZAC specs as to left,right, etc.
Assembly manual shows the older method of just bending .500 x .035
tubing around the struts and riveting it to add the JURY Struts.
Drawings (CAD version) shows the four different lengths of tubing
required on each wing (tubing was with my kit) but these 7V10-3SP Jury
Struts attach to the 7V10-1SP struts via 7V10-5SP and -6SP Jury Strut
Brackets. (Not in my kit, no problem....easy to make, the drawings
indicate 4130 material, .049 thick).
What is confusing is the drawing showing "detail" of the Jury Strut
Brackets, with Jury Struts, attached to the Wing Strut on Sheet 7V10.
The Jury Struts appear to have been "swedged" on the ends....and there
is "cross-hatching" drawn in the last 20 or 30 mm of the ends of each
Jury Strut. What is the deal?
Last item on Page 7V10 is a "Jury Strut Cap" (7V10-7SP).
Best guess is that this is 1/2" wide x 1/4" thick aluminum bar. (It is
shown as 12 mm wide x .250" thick, 21 & 40 mm lengths needed)
Is this 7V10-7SP "cap" just stuck into the ends of the 1/2" jury tubing
and then flattened with a hammer? Then drill through this for an AN3
bolt? Surely this can't be! Okay, so it is....then the proper name for
the item would be Jury Strut Insert.
Appreciate any photos or comments, directions, corrections, or hammer
instructions.
Thanks and best regards.....105 degrees today. Paint dries REAL fast
in this weather.
Zed/701/R912/still diddling
do not archive
=========================
==========
=========================
==========
=========================
==========
=========================
==========
************************************
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are proprietary and intende
d solely
for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If yo
u have
received this e-mail in error please notify the sender. Please note that
any views
or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and d
o not
necessarily represent those of ITT, Inc. The recipient should check
this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. ITT accepts
no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mai
l.
************************************
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Drag of a windmilling propellor |
I've looked at several old airplane performance texts to try to find
some actual engineering data on this subject. So far, the best I can
find comes from "Aerodynamics For Naval Aviators" (Rev. 1965), pages 148
and 149. This is a great reference for the non-engineer, by the way.
Very readable, and no math beyond multiplication and division.
To quote a few sentences from page 148: "At smaller blade angles near
the flat pitch position, the drag added by the propeller is very large.
At these small blade angles, the propeller windmilling at high RPM can
create such a tremendous amount of drag that the airplane may be
uncontrollable. The propeller windmilling at high speed in the low range
of blade angles can produce an increase in parasite drag which may be as
great as the parasite drag of the basic airplane. An indication of this
powerful drag is seen by the helicopter in autorotation. The
windmilling rotor is capable of producing autorotation rates of descent
which approach that of a parachute canopy with the identical disc area
loading. Thus, the propeller rotating at high speed and small blade
angle can produce an effective drag coefficient of the disc area which
compares with that of a parachute canopy."
This seems to confirm the comparison of a windmilling prop to a
helicopter rotor or parachute. The question remains though, what is
meant by "smaller blade angles", or "low range of blade angles"?
On page 149 there is a chart which depicts the change in equivalent
parasite area vs blade pitch angle. At blade pitch angles near zero the
parasite area, hence the drag, of the windmilling propeller goes clear
off the top of the chart, as expected. For a pitch angle around 15
degrees, somewhere close to a fixed pitch (or ground adjustable) prop on
a light airplane, the drag of the windmilling prop is about twice that
of a stopped prop. Somewhere between 20 and 25 degrees blade pitch the
two curves cross over, and at higher blade angles the drag of the
stopped prop is actually greater. Of course, both are equal, and
minimum, at the 90 degree feathered position. The source of this chart
is not indicated, so details of blade planform, number of blades, RPM
etc. are lacking.
If anyone has a good engineering reference on this subject, I'd
appreciate knowing about it.
George
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Airplane insurance. |
Hi Jim,
I did give this a little thought, but decided not to discuss it on
the list. But since you brought it up . . .
I agree with you this might be an excuse for your insurance company
to deny a claim. The way to deal with that is to be sure you
understand what is covered by your insurance and what is not. I
would think any airplane insurance policy should have a section that
discusses operations that are covered and the other kind.
Another issue which comes up in this discussion is whether or not it
is a good idea to have insurance at all. I suppose it depends on
each plane owner's financial condition and willingness to pay for an
insurance policy which under most circumstances will never pay a
dime. After all, even with experimental home built airplanes (the
most dangerous kind) the most dangerous portion of each flight will
be driving your car to the airport.
Perhaps the most interesting question is how to evaluate the dollar
value of all the labor we put into our planes. Should insurance pay
to repair them? Perhaps it should only cover replacement materials
and we should put another ton of labor into a damaged plane.
This sounds like a fertile area for a whole new thread of discussion.
I guess I'll change the Subject line.
Paul
XL Fuselage
>One consideration I have not seen mentioned in the debate about
>night flight with a Rotax: The FAA may or may not care, in an
>experimental amateur built aircraft, whether Rotax gives you
>permission to fly at night with their engine. But it seems to me
>your insurance company might, in case you care about such things. I
>bend my airplane in an engine-out night landing and I would expect
>the insurance company to point out to me that Rotax says no night
>flight, and they (the insurance company) would say "tough
>luck". Maybe this is not right. Any thoughts?
>
>Jim Greenough
-
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
It doesn't make any difference what Rotax says, what matters is what
the insurance policy says. If you didn't change the configuration of
the plane since the policy was written and the company didn't
specifically exclude night flight in that configuration, they are
bound by the terms of the contract. They may nit-pick the hell out of
every detail of the policy, but they can't change it after the fact.
Remember, this advice is worth every penny you paid for it. :)
On Jul 15, 2006, at 11:08 PM, Tebenkof@aol.com wrote:
> One consideration I have not seen mentioned in the debate about
> night flight with a Rotax: The FAA may or may not care, in an
> experimental amateur built aircraft, whether Rotax gives you
> permission to fly at night with their engine. But it seems to me
> your insurance company might, in case you care about such things.
> I bend my airplane in an engine-out night landing and I would
> expect the insurance company to point out to me that Rotax says no
> night flight, and they (the insurance company) would say "tough
> luck". Maybe this is not right. Any thoughts?
>
> Jim Greenough
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Back in the saddle Seat Belt Attachments. |
Jon,
We all are really GLAD that you are well (in perfect shape very soon, I am shure).
This mail from you is a great lesson for all of us. Thank you very much for
your honest and to the point comment. It was close, I know but not your time...
Good thing that the airplane got most of the energy and saved you...
Now, about John's comment. Probably the belts could need a little more attachment
force.
But lets be honest that the human body can only take certain amount of "G" forces
before (fataly and serious) damaging the brain and vital organs... Thats
the big diference betwen the modern cars like Volvo and Mercedes (just to mention
a pair, not to beguin a discussion) and the 50s era "strong" Desoto,
Chevys and Fords, that they didnt even had seat belts (at least here in Mexico)...
I am sure now that I see Jon's photos that Mr Heintz was thinking in this matter
when he designed the 701 cabin area.
I realy hope (and honestly pray) that I (or any one of us in the list) never
have a serious accident flying, but I trust blind folded the ZAC airplanes.
Welcome back Jon, If I can be of help, please let me know.
Saludos
Gary Gower.
Flying from Chapala, Mexico.
701 912S
Building a 601 XL, No engine choise yet.
John Bolding <jnbolding1@teleshare.net> wrote:
Jon wrote,
the right seat belt attachment came off the center tunnel structure)
I ASSUME (a dangerous thing to do) that everyone will want to chase this rabbit
until a solution is offered.
I have always felt that compared to other designs, namely those that I have built
or worked on, the restraint hardware on the 701 is on the light side.
PLEASE don't think that I'm trying to second guess Chris here, maybe the attach
fitting failed just when and how it was designed (everything has a limit)
but I would rather have a harness that stays where it's bolted, keeping me out
of the inst panel. I realize there are a host of design considerations here.
I also suspect that if there had been a passenger there would have been a lot
more load in the center attach area and the POSSIBILITY of failure with less
restraint than it offered Jon in this case while solo.
Anyone else having heartburn over this one?
Jon, THANKS for your being so open with your experiences , it's helping us all
build and fly better and safer. LOW&SLOW John
---------------------------------
Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 Jury Strut question |
Zed,
I used my vice to squeeze the end of the jury struts. I also epoxied the
very end of the strut to keep the strut cap in place. I found that some of them
would slide in the jury tube.
Bob Spudis
N701ZX 60 hrs
In a message dated 7/16/2006 12:01:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
Keith.Ashcraft@itt.com writes:
Is this 7V10-7SP "cap" just stuck into the ends of the 1/2" jury tubing and
then flattened with a hammer? Then drill through this for an AN3 bolt?
Surely this can't be! Okay, so it is....then the proper name for the item would
be Jury Strut Insert.
Appreciate any photos or comments, directions, corrections, or hammer
instructions.
Thanks and best regards.....105 degrees today. Paint dries REAL fast in
this weather.
Zed/701/R912/still diddling
do not archive
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Drag of a windmilling propellor |
Hello George and list,
Talking about first hand experience, I had flown weight shift trikes for the
last 12 years, they glide lot better than most ultralights, so landing with
the engine stoped was (still is) a very common manuver here.
A few years ago (maybe about 4), there were at least two machines that where
imported "full equiped", "top of the hill" by a couple of rich pilots, both
had 582 Rotax engines and they came with a new style of clutch for the propeller,
that in my personal opinon was a highly engineered go kart centrifugal
clutch :-)
The engine could be started and run at idle, the propeller will not move, will
not engage until certain rpms... This was an idea for safety in the ground...
Engine idled smooth.
But also when the engine was stoped at altitude, the prop will freely windmill
(no direct conection with the reducction unit). They were so draggy (compared
with same model of trikes but without this clutch), that the gliding distance
was shortened at least more than a half! The pilots comment that they feeled
like opening a droge shute...
Just a first hand witnessed comment, that came to my memory from your post.
Saludos
Gary Gower.
Flying from Chapala, Mexico.
Now in "normal" airplanes :-)
Do not archive.
George Swinford <grs-pms@comcast.net> wrote:
I've looked at several old airplane performance texts to try to find
some actual engineering data on this subject. So far, the best I can find comes
from "Aerodynamics For Naval Aviators" (Rev. 1965), pages 148 and 149. This
is a great reference for the non-engineer, by the way. Very readable, and no
math beyond multiplication and division.
To quote a few sentences from page 148: "At smaller blade angles near the flat
pitch position, the drag added by the propeller is very large. At these small
blade angles, the propeller windmilling at high RPM can create such a tremendous
amount of drag that the airplane may be uncontrollable. The propeller windmilling
at high speed in the low range of blade angles can produce an increase
in parasite drag which may be as great as the parasite drag of the basic airplane.
An indication of this powerful drag is seen by the helicopter in autorotation.
The windmilling rotor is capable of producing autorotation rates of
descent which approach that of a parachute canopy with the identical disc area
loading. Thus, the propeller rotating at high speed and small blade angle
can produce an effective drag coefficient of the disc area which compares with
that of a parachute canopy."
This seems to confirm the comparison of a windmilling prop to a helicopter rotor
or parachute. The question remains though, what is meant by "smaller blade
angles", or "low range of blade angles"?
On page 149 there is a chart which depicts the change in equivalent parasite
area vs blade pitch angle. At blade pitch angles near zero the parasite area,
hence the drag, of the windmilling propeller goes clear off the top of the chart,
as expected. For a pitch angle around 15 degrees, somewhere close to a fixed
pitch (or ground adjustable) prop on a light airplane, the drag of the windmilling
prop is about twice that of a stopped prop. Somewhere between 20 and
25 degrees blade pitch the two curves cross over, and at higher blade angles
the drag of the stopped prop is actually greater. Of course, both are equal,
and minimum, at the 90 degree feathered position. The source of this chart
is not indicated, so details of blade planform, number of blades, RPM etc. are
lacking.
If anyone has a good engineering reference on this subject, I'd appreciate knowing
about it.
George
---------------------------------
Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|