Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:27 AM - Re: Re: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning Stiffeners (Jean-Paul Roy)
2. 04:33 AM - FRAPPR Map (Rick R)
3. 05:14 AM - LSA training (Tim Perkins)
4. 05:28 AM - Number of 701 builders? (Zed Smith)
5. 05:59 AM - Re: LSA training (Paul Mulwitz)
6. 06:08 AM - Re: Number of 701 builders? (Paul Mulwitz)
7. 06:36 AM - Re: Steve Adams'Zenair Zodiac CH640 (steveadams)
8. 07:42 AM - Not Appollo 11 (Doug Sire)
9. 07:42 AM - Economical Low Pressure Air System (Doug Sire)
10. 07:57 AM - Homemade paint hood/booth (John Bolding)
11. 08:18 AM - Re: Introducing (Welded Parts) (Noel Loveys)
12. 08:29 AM - Re: Re: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning Stiffeners (Randy L. Thwing)
13. 08:35 AM - Re: Number of 701 builders? (Tom and Bren Henderson)
14. 08:39 AM - Hinge less ailerons (John Hines)
15. 09:05 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Craig Payne)
16. 09:05 AM - Re: Re: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning Stiffeners (Chuck Deiterich)
17. 09:12 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Tom and Bren Henderson)
18. 09:28 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Dave Austin)
19. 09:32 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Dave G.)
20. 09:36 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Paul Mulwitz)
21. 09:39 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Graham Kirby)
22. 09:56 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Randy Bryant)
23. 10:12 AM - Re: Re: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning Stiffeners (Jean-Paul Roy)
24. 10:27 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Daniel Vandenberg)
25. 11:18 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (MacDonald Doug)
26. 11:39 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Gary Gower)
27. 11:43 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons ()
28. 11:48 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Gig Giacona)
29. 11:48 AM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (kevinbonds)
30. 11:51 AM - Paint booths and respirators (LarryMcFarland)
31. 11:59 AM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Tom and Bren Henderson)
32. 11:59 AM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons ()
33. 12:07 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Craig Payne)
34. 12:16 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Randy Bryant)
35. 12:25 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Randy Bryant)
36. 12:41 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons -Just The Facts Maam (N5SL)
37. 12:41 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Gary Boothe)
38. 12:48 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (John Hines)
39. 12:50 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Jaybannist@cs.com)
40. 12:53 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons -Just The Facts Maam (Craig Payne)
41. 01:04 PM - Hinge types (Zed Smith)
42. 01:42 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Ron Pizer)
43. 02:13 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Clyde Barcus)
44. 02:30 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Gig Giacona)
45. 02:41 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Edward Moody II)
46. 02:45 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Edward Moody II)
47. 03:01 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons -Just The Facts Maam (Edward Moody II)
48. 03:12 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Tom and Bren Henderson)
49. 03:27 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (TxDave)
50. 03:30 PM - Hinge less ailerons (Robert L. Stone)
51. 03:51 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Zodie Rocket)
52. 03:56 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Randy Bryant)
53. 03:56 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Zodie Rocket)
54. 04:05 PM - Re: Rudder skin bending technique (Bill Naumuk)
55. 04:17 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (NYTerminat@aol.com)
56. 04:20 PM - Clecos (Bill Naumuk)
57. 04:27 PM - Jim Pensinger (Zodie Rocket)
58. 04:32 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Tom and Bren Henderson)
59. 04:55 PM - Hinge less ailerons / Corvair - resale (Robin Bellach)
60. 04:58 PM - 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas (Bob Percival)
61. 05:08 PM - Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas (Ron Lendon)
62. 05:11 PM - Re: Clecos (Jim Hoak)
63. 05:11 PM - Re: Clecos (George Swinford)
64. 05:12 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (LHusky@aol.com)
65. 05:24 PM - Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas (Jaybannist@cs.com)
66. 05:32 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Gary Boothe)
67. 05:35 PM - Re: Rudder skin bending technique (Ron Lendon)
68. 05:42 PM - RE : Re: Clecos (Carlos Sa)
69. 05:44 PM - Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas (kevinbonds)
70. 05:50 PM - Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas (TxDave)
71. 05:51 PM - Re: Rudder skin bending technique (lwinger)
72. 06:00 PM - Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas (lwinger)
73. 06:11 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Clyde Barcus)
74. 06:33 PM - Re: Hinge types (Paul Moore)
75. 06:50 PM - Re: Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas (Randy Bryant)
76. 07:35 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (John Hines)
77. 07:43 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (Peter Chapman)
78. 08:01 PM - Back inside cover of Kit Planes ()
79. 08:07 PM - Re: Hinge less ailerons (Randy Stout)
80. 08:39 PM - Re: Back inside cover of Kit Planes (Chuck Deiterich)
81. 09:29 PM - Re: Re: Hinge less ailerons (NYTerminat@aol.com)
82. 09:42 PM - Re: Back inside cover of Kit Planes (NYTerminat@aol.com)
83. 09:43 PM - Re: Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas (Bob Percival)
84. 09:59 PM - sourcing .25" angle for Dave Clay's brake press (Bob Percival)
85. 10:02 PM - worktable-laminated I-beams (George Swinford)
86. 10:14 PM - Re: Back inside cover of Kit Planes (Bob Percival)
87. 11:02 PM - Re: sourcing .25" angle for Dave Clay's brake press (Larry Winger)
88. 11:57 PM - Re: sourcing .25" angle for Dave Clay's brake press (Tom and Bren Henderson)
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: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning Stiffeners |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jean-Paul Roy" <jean-paul.roy4@tlb.sympatico.ca>
Hello Randy, could you tell me what model of Tapco brake you have?
Thanks
Jean-Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy L. Thwing" <n4546v@mindspring.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 12:01 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning
Stiffeners
> Hello Tommy:
> Here are a couple of more ways of looking at anti-oil-canning braces.
> The first thing I did was to go out to the TAPCO brake with some of my
> extensive .016 scrap inventory and bent up some really nice "Z" sections
> which I then installed diagonally on the fuselage sides, bottom & top,
> between the verticals. Since it was non-structural, I used #3 solid
rivets
> (cheaper) rather than Avex. This is shown in the attached picture before
> riveting. I then proudly posted my results to the list and was
immediately
> talked out of using my newly formed "Z". I believe it was Chuck D who
> advised that by using "L" rather than "Z", after installation, one could
> make a trip back into the fuselage with their fluting pliers and slightly
> flute the "L" which very gently "curves" each fuselage section outward,
> thereby putting a bit of tension at each station. I thought this was
> excellent advice, so much so that I scrapped all my newly formed "Z" and
> made another trip to the brake with more .016 material from my extensive
> stock of previously destroyed parts and formed the "L" section which is
> shown in the photo. As this is non-structural, and as a "scrap-builder",
I
> used .016 material to save weight. Kit builders could easily use the
> furnished .025 standard "L". I think the fluting operation has great
value
> and eliminates stringing wires across the rear fuse.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Randy L. Thwing, Las Vegas
>
>
> > Bruce do you have any pictures of the wire braces?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Tommy Walker in Alabama
> > Do Not Archive
> >
> >
> > bvthomas(at)bigpond.com wrote:
> > > Hi Dave,
> > > I added diagonal "L" stiffeners in each panel on0 the sides and top &
> bottom of my 701.
>
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 |
|
Wholly cow ! We're up to 205 701 builders worldwide!
http://www.frappr.com/zenith701/map
do not archive
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Tim Perkins" <Timothy.Perkins@uvm.edu>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
>
> While you can take your LSA training in a C-150 you can't do
> the practical test in a C-150 because it doesn't qualify.
You can take dual instruction in a non-LSA compliant aircraft (C-150),
however you cannot solo, do the solo cross-country, or take the practical
test unless the plane qualifies under LSA rules.
Tim Perkins, VT
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 |
|
| Subject: | Number of 701 builders? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
Rick,
Couldn't pass this up......your post was positioned on my display such that there
was a speck of something on the screen; looked like 205,701. That's a lot
of STOL aircraft!
Wiped the speck (comma) off. Made more sense that way.
However, considering recent events, this may be the future.
At least you could have carry-on bags.
do not archive
Zed/etc
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: LSA training |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
I think this statement is true if the student doesn't hold a medical
certificate but is using a state driver's license for medical
qualification as a student pilot. On the other hand, if the student
has a standard 3'rd class medical and student pilot license then he
can solo any class of trainer and still test for and receive a Sport
Pilot certificate. At that point the medical will serve to qualify
him for further training toward a Private Pilot certificate.
Paul
XL fuselage
>You can take dual instruction in a non-LSA compliant aircraft (C-150),
>however you cannot solo, do the solo cross-country, or take the practical
>test unless the plane qualifies under LSA rules.
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Number of 701 builders? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
Yeah, if I understand the bureaucratic (so called) thought process
this means we will forever be banned from carrying toothpaste onto
airliners for fear we might put it in our shoes and light it on fire
using green Scotchbright for a fuse.
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive or squeal on me to the feds
>However, considering recent events, this may be the future.
>At least you could have carry-on bags.
>
>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: Steve Adams'Zenair Zodiac CH640 |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "steveadams" <dr_steve_adams@yahoo.com>
Thanks. There is about a 10-11 month delay between submission and when you see
your completion in the magazine. I have been flying the heck out of the plane,
and now have about 235 hours in just over a year. My next milestone will be flying
it for more hours than it took me to build. I just finished my first condition
inspection and found no problems. My kit was #0052, ordered in May 2004.
I think mine was the 3rd owner built 640 to fly. I believe there are 2 others
that have since been completed and a number making serious progress toward finishing.
The numbers are relatively small, but the 640 is a nice plane. If I
was just now looking at buying a kit, I would make the same choice.
Just a few thoughts from the perpective of flying your creation for a while. The
process of building is a process of learning, with a series of milestones along
the way. Each part you complete and each skill that you learn is a step toward
the ultimate milestone; the first flight. We hear a lot about the building
process, and of course we celebrate each first flight in anticipation of our
own. We hear about the problems encountered after the first flight, and sadly
we discuss the accidents that occur. But we rarely hear much more of what happens
after that first flight. It also is a learning process every bit as challenging
and rewarding as the actual building. The learning curve is steepest during
those first few hours as you explore the characteristics of your new plane.
To me that first power on full stall was almost as nerve wracking as the first
flight, until it just mushed straight over and started flying again. With
each characteristic and phase of flight you explore, you gain confidence and
respect for the airplane you created. Later you start to refine things as you
discover how to best fly the pattern and land, how it handles x-winds and different
loadings. In essence you begin to know your airplane in flight every bit
as well as you knew every bolt, rivet and wire as you were building. Then as
you put in a few hours, your role changes from builder and test pilot to mechanic
and aircraft owner, and there is a whole new set of skills to learn and tools
to buy. You quickly learn that what was an easy thing to do during the build,
turns you into a contortionist when you have to get back in to inspect, change
or repair. You discover things that maybe you should have done a little differently,
or some other addition that you would like to make to the airplane.
I guess what I am saying is that what you started by drilling that first hole
in the rudder spar, doesn't end with pulling the last rivet or the first flight.
It's a continual challenge and source of enjoyment. Happy building and flying.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54076#54076
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Doug Sire" <dsire@imt.net>
Sorry, should have been Appollo 13!
Doug Sire
Do Not Archive
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: | Economical Low Pressure Air System |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Doug Sire" <dsire@imt.net>
This just proves that you can't watch "Apollo 11" too many times!
Doug Sire
601XL
Do Not Archive
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: | Homemade paint hood/booth |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Bolding" <jnbolding1@teleshare.net>
> From: LarryMcFarland <larry@macsmachine.com>
> Subject: Zenith-List: Economical Low Pressure Air System
>
> Hi guys,
> Ive been painting with Hangar 21 AFS water borne system and was getting
> along very confidently with a 3M dual filter organic charcoal
> respirator, but I made a mistake that could have gone very wrong. I
> turned on the exhaust fans in my booth, but due to interference with am
> radio reception, Id earlier unplugged the fans at the wall. I sprayed
> the trim color on my stabilizer, which took no more than about
> 5-minutes. Over spray build up was such that I was seriously worried
> about effectiveness of my respirator. It has limits for heavy
> concentrations. I couldnt smell the paint or fumes, but did feel a bit
> dizzy later. That did it! I decided to put an air system in front of my
> respirator. After checking what others have done, I made up a hood and
> mask system that fits over the 3M Respirator that guarantees fresh air
> is the only thing my respirator would have to deal with.
> A hood was cut and sewn from a disposable Tyvex paint suit. The legs
> were cut off in a radial pattern from the crotch to the armpits and sewn
> shut. The zipper was oriented to place the shut-end at back center of my
> head. I bought a new face shield and put 1/2-inch Velcro on the outer
> edges of the clear shield and across the solid top edge. The Tyvex
> face was placed tightly against the sticky side of the Velcro and the
> Tyvex inside that perimeter was cut out. Integration of the mask and the
> hood only took an hour and a half and the cost was well below equivalent
> commercial parts. I also purchased a small portable vacuum and ordered
> 50-foot of air hose. The hood combination face shield fits over the
> respirator and inside the neck of my other Tyvex paint suit. An
> accessory hose-fitting relieves excess pressure and reduces to a
> 3/8-inch hose for inflating things. The small hose extends into the hood
> and is supported at my belt. I use Saran wrap on the face shield and its
> replaced as needed. The apparatus is comfortable, easily maintains
> visibility and still allows a good range of motion for spraying in the
> booth. Should have done this in the first place.
>
Couple of points before we get to the "meat" of this post.
I'm sure that a lot of you will be using some sort of paint "booth" for your
projects and I'll throw in my nickels worth of experience here in the hope
that it might save someone's bacon. I've made this same post before a
couple yrs ago but most folks don't go back thru the archives and we've a
lot of new listers so hang with me for a min.
To preface this let me first state that in my 35 yr career in the spray
equipment industry I sold/ designed/ installed/ moved/ repaired over a
thousand spray booths along the Texas Gulf Coast. They ranged in size from a
bread box to the largest which housed a C5A. Not trying to impress anyone,
I'm too old for that , just stating this ain't my first rodeo and it isn't
"my opinion", you can take it to the bank.
I have seen HUNDREDS of homemade booths , some of which were the equivalent
of factory made but most scared the hell out of me. (I've also looked at a
LOT of the remains of some of those after a fire/explosion and have
testified as a witness during civil trials)
The overwhelming number of homemade booths use some sort of fan designed for
something BESIDES paint booth operation. A booth exhaust fan has a tunnel
drive which puts the motor(no, it does NOT have to be explosion proof)
outside the airstream, it also has a non sparking blade,usually alum but
sometimes brass.
Think about this , if you use a direct drive fan (with the blade mounted on
the motor shaft)to EXHAUST your booth you are drawing the vapor laden fumes
DIRECTLY over/thru your SPARKING motor. The ONLY reason it doesn't explode
more often is it's too lean a mixture. BUT if you drop your gun or turn over
a paint container or spray a LOT in a small area, or inadvertently point the
gun in the fans direction you are asking for trouble, it makes a BIG
explosion, trust me I've seen the aftermath lots of times. Oh yeah, it
usually kills you.
I'm sure that some of you will argue that you are using a Totally Enclosed
or Explosion Proof (Explosion Proof means something different than what you
might think)motor direct drive and you haven't had any problem and it works
"fine". Yep ,it does 'till the outside of the motor reaches temp over
ignition temp of your paint. It doesn't happen very often as everything has
to be just right but it makes an impressive bang when all the stars line up.
To get an idea how much air is required on a code rated booth to SAFELY keep
the levels down please realize that an automotive booth
(26'longx14'widex9'high)has a fan that completely changes the air every 15
SECONDS. 12,000 Cubic feet per min. plus or minus a little.
To build a SAFER booth, keep ALL the lights outside the walls shinning thru
the plastic (the surface of the bulb is WAY over the ignition temp of the
paint ,unless TOTALLY waterborn) but MOST importantly install the fan to
blow INTO the booth, forcing the dirty air out an opening that is floor
level (nearly all solvents are heavier than air) at the other end.
Every time that Kitplanes or SportAviation publishes an article on homemade
booths I give them this missive and they pee down both legs when they
realize what they wrote, then in a couple yrs they publish another, crazy.
On the paint hood issue I use one a lot now that the paints are so
obnoxious.
Used to when you started to smell the solvent (if using a mask)it was time
to change the cartridges but now a lot of the nasty stuff has poor or no
warning qualities so change them OFTEN. I sold a hood for many yrs that had
no eyeshield, all the air spilled out the front opening ,better view, no
contamination as the overspray wasn't going to swim upstream and enter the
hood but OSHA killed it, typical "Big Brother" mentality. Easy enought to
make one however.
OK ,I've stirred the pot enough in the last 2 weeks, back to lurking.
LOW&SLOW John Bolding
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Introducing (Welded Parts) |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
May I echo Mark's remarks on asking questions. The question that you may
consider "silly" to ask may not only end up saving your life but also the
life of some one else who doesn't have the courage to ask. Keep it up. The
other side of the coin is just as valid. If in your building you see
something that can be improved on discuss it with every one. The folks at
ZAC will be happy to improve their product and other builders will have the
opportunity to make constructive changes. Those with built aircraft will
have additional items to check to make their aircraft safer. Note I didn't
suggest that you start making changes willy nilly but openly discuss any
changes/improvements you perceive.
As for the "Hardware Store" nuts and bolts.... I've seen them on everything
from Ultralites to DHC Beavers. I've seen them in structural areas and I
still have a problem with any one who owns an expensive aircraft held
together with Canadian Tire (Canada's hardware store) specials. Believe me
it does happen! Most of the aircraft I've worked on have regular
inspections and these things get caught but the fact is they should never
have been installed in the first place.
Noel
>
> Paul, keep making all the mistakes you want! Also, don't ever stop
> asking questions. There are many on this list afraid to ask a "stupid"
> question so they just plug on without really knowing what
> they are doing
> or they get frustrated and stop work. This goes for all of you! Ask
> questions, that's why the people flying stick around this
> list to answer
> the same questions they asked someone else 2 years earlier. As for the
> not having seen any wielded parts I just took it that you
> didn't see any
> parts of which you need to wield yourself, and being a kit
> builder their
> is not a single piece you would need to wield as they are all done for
> you.
>
> Here is the ultimate "Stupid" question I get on a regular basis. " Why
> can't I use standard hardware store nuts and bolts?" To many of us the
> answer is simple and we would never consider using such a low grade of
> hardware. But I thank god every time someone asks me that question
> because if they didn't know that there was such a huge difference in
> quality then they would likely have run out to the Home depot and
> install grade 3 or 4 bolts into the spars.
>
> Mark Townsend
> Can-Zac Aviation Ltd.
> president@can-zacaviation.com
> www.can-zacaviation.com
>
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: | Re: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning Stiffeners |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy L. Thwing" <n4546v@mindspring.com>
I think it's a "pro-14", It's ten feet long and rated for .032 Al max.
They make one (pro-14 HD) that's rated for .040 Al. You have to build up
the nose for the proper ZA radius, see my pic. I bent all parts for the 701
EXCEPT the .040 longerons. The web site shows what are probably improved
models over mine which I bought used locally. When you go to the site,
there are links to download pdf manuals for each model. I have since bought
a Roper-Whitney 8' shop brake rated for .062 steel so I can bend all but the
gear. I still use the Tapco for most "thin" jobs as the nose is permanently
set up for the ZA radius and it works fine.
http://www.tapcotools.com/pro14.php
Regards,
Randy L. Thwing, Las Vegas
> Hello Randy, could you tell me what model of Tapco brake you have?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jean-Paul
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: Number of 701 builders? |
I don't know about you guys, but I'm completely embarrassed at the way our
government reacts to a few bad guys. Yes, they kill innocent people without
notice and without thought. But COME ON! We're running around like the sky
is falling here! I'd much rather run a little higher risk of (questionably) being
attacked than be forced to give up the liberties our fathers and grandfathers
fought so hard to protect.
The day I can't fly my airplane from A to B because some old lady is afraid
I might be Osama ready to crash into her house, is the day I move to France.
(Yeah, I know they whine a lot, but so do we lately.)
Whatever happened to the brave, stoic attitude our grandfathers had? Please
tell me I'm not alone in this thought! lol
I'm about half a step from sending a toothpaste laden sheet of scotch-bright
to Bush himself!
Do Not Archive
Tom Henderson
601XL Fuselage
Looking forward to flying from A to B and NOT crashing into ANYONE'S home...
Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net> wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted
by: Paul Mulwitz
Yeah, if I understand the bureaucratic (so called) thought process
this means we will forever be banned from carrying toothpaste onto
airliners for fear we might put it in our shoes and light it on fire
using green Scotchbright for a fuse.
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive or squeal on me to the feds
>However, considering recent events, this may be the future.
>At least you could have carry-on bags.
>
>do not archive
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" <John.Hines@craftontull.com>
I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend
about the Zenith 601. For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is
credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president of
Trutrak. When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly
asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using. We then launched into the
normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a
piano hinge... He then said that questions of reliability weren't then
only reason he didn't like them. He said that flexing metal is not a
hinge, it is a spring. A spring requires more force to move than a
hinge. He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how
even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a
Bonanza.
After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane. The
elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff. But
you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.
Does the piano hinge give it better motion? How much weight does it
add?
All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a completed
tail kit. Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am. It's hard
to argue with a guy with his credentials. What do you guys think?
John
www.johnsplane.com
John R. Hines
IT Manager
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200
Rogers, AR 72756
Office: 479-878-2449
Mobile: 479-366-4783
Fax: 479-631-6224
John.Hines@craftontull.com
www.craftontull.com
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs
of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely
for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message
contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named.
If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute
or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have
received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If
you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information
is strictly prohibited.
Message 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: | Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
If you look in the file archive for this list you can see examples of AP
servos installed in 601's:
www.matronics.com/photoshare/craig@craigandjean.com.02.11.2006/
These include servos from Navaid and Treo. I assume at least one of these
planes uses the "skin" hinges. Any of the owners should be able to comment
on their servo performance: Jeff Small, Tony Graziano or Pat Safford.
>From my point of view I would bet that the force of the wind on the ailerons
generates much more counterforce than the "skin" hinge.
-- Craig
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: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning Stiffeners |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Chuck Deiterich" <cffd@pgrb.com>
Randy and Tommy,
Not only did I flute the .016 diagonal stiffeners I also fluted the
horizontal and vertical
.025 "L's" that make up the frames in the rear fuselage. Seems to work
fine.
Chuck D.
N701TX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy L. Thwing" <n4546v@mindspring.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning
Stiffeners
> Hello Tommy:
> Here are a couple of more ways of looking at anti-oil-canning braces.
> The first thing I did was to go out to the TAPCO brake with some of my
> extensive .016 scrap inventory and bent up some really nice "Z" sections
> which I then installed diagonally on the fuselage sides, bottom & top,
> between the verticals. Since it was non-structural, I used #3 solid
rivets
> (cheaper) rather than Avex. This is shown in the attached picture before
> riveting. I then proudly posted my results to the list and was
immediately
> talked out of using my newly formed "Z". I believe it was Chuck D who
> advised that by using "L" rather than "Z", after installation, one could
> make a trip back into the fuselage with their fluting pliers and slightly
> flute the "L" which very gently "curves" each fuselage section outward,
> thereby putting a bit of tension at each station. I thought this was
> excellent advice, so much so that I scrapped all my newly formed "Z" and
> made another trip to the brake with more .016 material from my extensive
> stock of previously destroyed parts and formed the "L" section which is
> shown in the photo. As this is non-structural, and as a "scrap-builder",
I
> used .016 material to save weight. Kit builders could easily use the
> furnished .025 standard "L". I think the fluting operation has great
value
> and eliminates stringing wires across the rear fuse.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Randy L. Thwing, Las Vegas
>
>
> > Bruce do you have any pictures of the wire braces?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Tommy Walker in Alabama
> > Do Not Archive
> >
> >
> > bvthomas(at)bigpond.com wrote:
> > > Hi Dave,
> > > I added diagonal "L" stiffeners in each panel on0 the sides and top &
> bottom of my 701.
>
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: Hinge less ailerons |
I'm definitely going with the hinged aileron, for all of the reasons you
mention. Bottom line is, it adds less than two pounds, it's smoother, and there
are no negative side effects to the conversion. It was kind of a no-brainer.
It helped my decision having moved the stick on both hinged and 'spring' ailerons.
The hinged were what you would expect, smooth. The extended skin 'spring'
was noticeably stiffer.
John Hines <John.Hines@craftontull.com> wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by:
"John Hines"
I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend
about the Zenith 601. For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is
credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president of
Trutrak. When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly
asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using. We then launched into the
normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a
piano hinge... He then said that questions of reliability weren't then
only reason he didn't like them. He said that flexing metal is not a
hinge, it is a spring. A spring requires more force to move than a
hinge. He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how
even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a
Bonanza.
After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane. The
elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff. But
you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.
Does the piano hinge give it better motion? How much weight does it
add?
All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a completed
tail kit. Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am. It's hard
to argue with a guy with his credentials. What do you guys think?
John
www.johnsplane.com
John R. Hines
IT Manager
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200
Rogers, AR 72756
Office: 479-878-2449
Mobile: 479-366-4783
Fax: 479-631-6224
John.Hines@craftontull.com
www.craftontull.com
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs
of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely
for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message
contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named.
If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute
or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have
received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If
you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information
is strictly prohibited.
Message 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2@can.rogers.com>
I've had both the bending aileron and the hinged on my 601. The only diff.
is slightly less effort on the stick for normal turns. If you want to roll
the a/c the ailerons are to my mind quite heavy in either format - not much
difference.
Dave Austin 601HDS - 912, Spitfire Mk VIII
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: | Re: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave G." <d.goddard@ns.sympatico.ca>
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hines" <John.Hines@craftontull.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 12:38 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
> After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane. The
> elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff. But
> you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.
> Does the piano hinge give it better motion? How much weight does it
> add?
In my single flight aboard a Zenith I noticed the same thing, very light
pitch and very heavy roll inputs. The owner seems to adapted well and I
didn't comment on it as it wasn't my plane. If replacing the "hinges" with
hinges would resolve the difference I'd probably make the change.
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
Hi John,
I think the choice between hingeless and piano hinge on the ailerons
is one that can go either way with little impact.
I agree with you that the actual design of the Zodiac XL works
without much movement of the ailerons. This is probably because the
actual aileron size is large enough that it doesn't need to move much
to create the roll moment we need for flight. I think of it as the
aileron translating force from the control stick to the airplane
without actually moving a great deal. It is the force rather than
the control surface movement that counts.
This may be different for an autopilot than a human pilot. There
isn't a force feedback system that tells the autopilot how hard it is
pushing on the flight control surface. That leaves actual motion as
the medium it uses to control the plane unlike the human pilot who uses force.
One impact of the hingeless design is it forms a perfect "Gap Seal"
between the aileron and wing. This is highly desirable and shows up
greatly in the low speed control that works so well on the
Zodiac. Again, this has nothing to do with autopilot function which
is primarily used at cruise speeds.
For me the decision is easy. I don't want to give up the fun of
flying to a computer. I am not installing an autopilot in my
plane. That means the hingeless design works best for me.
Best regards,
Paul
XL fuselage
At 08:38 AM 8/11/2006, you wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" <John.Hines@craftontull.com>
>
>I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend
>about the Zenith 601. For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is
>credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president of
>Trutrak. When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly
>asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using. We then launched into the
>normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a
>piano hinge... He then said that questions of reliability weren't then
>only reason he didn't like them. He said that flexing metal is not a
>hinge, it is a spring. A spring requires more force to move than a
>hinge. He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how
>even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a
>Bonanza.
>
>After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane. The
>elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff. But
>you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.
>Does the piano hinge give it better motion? How much weight does it
>add?
>
>All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a completed
>tail kit. Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am. It's hard
>to argue with a guy with his credentials. What do you guys think?
>
>John
>www.johnsplane.com
>
>
--
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: | Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Graham Kirby" <gk@601hd.com>
Regarding the bendy metal hinge design, does anyone know if there a
significant difference in aileron force between the XL and HD/HDS? The
HD/HDS design has full length ailerons, the XL does not. Do you need more
aileron deflection on the XL?
Graham Kirby
601HD
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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Bryant" <randy@n344rb.com>
I had all the same thoughts when I built my ailerons... My final
determination on the hingeless ailerons came down to drag. This set up is
more streamline and essentially have gap seals built in...
Seems everyone is concerned about weight, but no one is concerned about
drag...??
Randy
XL Wings - Plans Only
http://www.n344rb.com
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave G." <d.goddard@ns.sympatico.ca>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 12:31 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave G." <d.goddard@ns.sympatico.ca>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Hines" <John.Hines@craftontull.com>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 12:38 PM
> Subject: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
>> After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane. The
>> elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff. But
>> you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.
>> Does the piano hinge give it better motion? How much weight does it
>> add?
>
> In my single flight aboard a Zenith I noticed the same thing, very light
> pitch and very heavy roll inputs. The owner seems to adapted well and I
> didn't comment on it as it wasn't my plane. If replacing the "hinges" with
> hinges would resolve the difference I'd probably make the change.
>
>
>
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: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning Stiffeners |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jean-Paul Roy" <jean-paul.roy4@tlb.sympatico.ca>
Thanks for the info
Regards
Jean-Paul
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy L. Thwing" <n4546v@mindspring.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: 701 Oil Canning Stiffeners701 Oil Canning
Stiffeners
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy L. Thwing"
<n4546v@mindspring.com>
>
> I think it's a "pro-14", It's ten feet long and rated for .032 Al max.
> They make one (pro-14 HD) that's rated for .040 Al. You have to build up
> the nose for the proper ZA radius, see my pic. I bent all parts for the
701
> EXCEPT the .040 longerons. The web site shows what are probably improved
> models over mine which I bought used locally. When you go to the site,
> there are links to download pdf manuals for each model. I have since
bought
> a Roper-Whitney 8' shop brake rated for .062 steel so I can bend all but
the
> gear. I still use the Tapco for most "thin" jobs as the nose is
permanently
> set up for the ZA radius and it works fine.
>
> http://www.tapcotools.com/pro14.php
>
> Regards,
>
> Randy L. Thwing, Las Vegas
>
>
> > Hello Randy, could you tell me what model of Tapco brake you have?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Jean-Paul
>
>
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: Hinge less ailerons |
William Wynne,et al commented on this some time ago, as they had removed the hinge-less
ailerons on their 601XL taildragger in favor of hinges.
As I recall, their conclusion after this was that the roll forces were slightly
lower (slightly improved) in slow flight...but the same at cruise speeds. In
the end they concluded that the benefit was minimal.
You can read about this here...about 1/3rd of the way down the page:
http://www.flycorvair.com/hangar1105.html
Dan
John Hines <John.Hines@craftontull.com> wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by:
"John Hines"
I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend
about the Zenith 601. For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is
credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president of
Trutrak. When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly
asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using. We then launched into the
normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a
piano hinge... He then said that questions of reliability weren't then
only reason he didn't like them. He said that flexing metal is not a
hinge, it is a spring. A spring requires more force to move than a
hinge. He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how
even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a
Bonanza.
After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane. The
elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff. But
you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.
Does the piano hinge give it better motion? How much weight does it
add?
All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a completed
tail kit. Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am. It's hard
to argue with a guy with his credentials. What do you guys think?
John
www.johnsplane.com
John R. Hines
IT Manager
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200
Rogers, AR 72756
Office: 479-878-2449
Mobile: 479-366-4783
Fax: 479-631-6224
John.Hines@craftontull.com
www.craftontull.com
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs
of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely
for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message
contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named.
If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute
or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have
received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If
you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information
is strictly prohibited.
---------------------------------
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: MacDonald Doug <dougsnash@yahoo.com>
As a CH-701 builder I'm asking this question out of
complete ignorance.
Would there not be a tendancy for the aluminum of a
hingless aileron to work harden at the flex point?
Admittedly I have not looked closely at the aileron
attachment on a CH-601 so I can't picture how it
works. I'm just basing my question on the
descriptions you guys have given.
Doug MacDonald
NW Ontario, Canada
CH-701 Scratch Builder
__________________________________________________
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hinge less ailerons |
All I can comment is that the 601 XL , even with the flexing metal "spring" is
lighter in control than most of the airplanes I have flown (from the right seat),
so I dont thing it will need a bigger servo. I have Navaid autopilot not
installed yet... Maybe Navaid is better :-)
The other way I will be scared to move a lighter stick to any side and make an
inadverted roll like flying a Pitts :-) :-)
Saludos
Gary Gower.
Do not archive.
John Hines <John.Hines@craftontull.com> wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by:
"John Hines"
I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend
about the Zenith 601. For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is
credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president of
Trutrak. When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly
asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using. We then launched into the
normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a
piano hinge... He then said that questions of reliability weren't then
only reason he didn't like them. He said that flexing metal is not a
hinge, it is a spring. A spring requires more force to move than a
hinge. He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how
even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a
Bonanza.
After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane. The
elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff. But
you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.
Does the piano hinge give it better motion? How much weight does it
add?
All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a completed
tail kit. Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am. It's hard
to argue with a guy with his credentials. What do you guys think?
John
www.johnsplane.com
John R. Hines
IT Manager
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200
Rogers, AR 72756
Office: 479-878-2449
Mobile: 479-366-4783
Fax: 479-631-6224
John.Hines@craftontull.com
www.craftontull.com
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs
of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely
for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message
contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named.
If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute
or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have
received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If
you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information
is strictly prohibited.
---------------------------------
Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <dredmoody@cox.net>
I've only flown the 601XL so my opinion is pure conjecture, but I've found with
my UL that aileron surface close to the fuselage is as useless as a screen door
on a submarine. The air flow is not as smooth there and the result is more
drag than roll reaction. Flaps work well there but the ailerons return more roll
for effort out near the wingtips.
Ed Moody II
---- Graham Kirby <gk@601hd.com> wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Graham Kirby" <gk@601hd.com>
>
> Regarding the bendy metal hinge design, does anyone know if there a
> significant difference in aileron force between the XL and HD/HDS? The
> HD/HDS design has full length ailerons, the XL does not. Do you need more
> aileron deflection on the XL?
>
> Graham Kirby
> 601HD
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we are flying
and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the way the aileron
is hinged.
That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required to roll the
plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross country you are going
to have a lot of trouble picking up individual rivets to build the thing.
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54183#54183
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: | Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "kevinbonds" <kevinbonds@comcast.net>
I doubt you will ever deflect the ailerons far enough to work-harden them.
The "hinge" does not actually bend (ie stretch). I think it is more akin to
the kind of flex you might get when rolling up your aluminum for storage.
Kevin Bonds
Nashville TN
601XL Plans building.
http://home.comcast.net/~kevinbonds
do not archive DO NOT ARCHIVE
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MacDonald Doug
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
--> Zenith-List message posted by: MacDonald Doug <dougsnash@yahoo.com>
As a CH-701 builder I'm asking this question out of
complete ignorance.
Would there not be a tendancy for the aluminum of a
hingless aileron to work harden at the flex point?
Admittedly I have not looked closely at the aileron
attachment on a CH-601 so I can't picture how it
works. I'm just basing my question on the
descriptions you guys have given.
Doug MacDonald
NW Ontario, Canada
CH-701 Scratch Builder
__________________________________________________
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: | Paint booths and respirators |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: LarryMcFarland <larry@macsmachine.com>
Thank you John,
I totally agree on the need to be careful when youre painting and it is
necessary to put some pre-thought into fans, vents and filters for
painting an aircraft. Ive done engineering on only 3 commercial
standard booths and they were for companies that required high volume
constant production painting. If you do your own booth specifically for
water-borne paint and adhere to good filters, there should be no color
leaks outside the booth, and you shouldnt have to be afraid of the
task. Progressively painting one aircraft doesnt have to be dangerous
if you take your time and dont over load the air in exchange. Clear the
booth and place intervals for your painting to avoid concentrations. Use
a HVLP gun or the latest equivalent from DeVilbiss and above all, stay
attentive to what is going on. My overlooking the fans at a critical
time points out human error and under worse conditions, even the best
respirator has limits for your safety if its overloaded. This is a
point that cannot be emphasized enough, and the reason I suggested you
consider a cheap home made low-pressure air hood ahead of the respirator.
With a little bit of research youd find there are no remedies for paint
damaged lungs, and you may have difficulty with breathing 24 hours after
youve sucked in chemicals from the paint. From there, you can be dead
within 72 hours, so its certainly not something to be casual about.
Do sweat the small stuff!
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hinge less ailerons |
The hinged aileron is his design as well...
Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@cox.net> wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig
Giacona"
I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we are flying
and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the way the aileron
is hinged.
That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required to roll the
plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross country you are going
to have a lot of trouble picking up individual rivets to build the thing.
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54183#54183
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <dredmoody@cox.net>
Good point..... one lister is expressing hesitance to contradict an experienced
flyer who doesn't like the design but seems totally okee dokee with not trusting
Chris Heintz's design and testing experience. Go figure,
Ed
---- Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@cox.net> wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
>
> I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we are
flying and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the way the aileron
is hinged.
>
> That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required to roll
the plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross country you are going
to have a lot of trouble picking up individual rivets to build the thing.
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54183#54183
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
Zenith actually did a life test with a motor flexing a sample. It went tens
of thousands of cycles before short cracks appeared at the ends. I think
they then drilled two stop holes and continued the test. You will die of old
age before this is a real problem.
-- Craig
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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Bryant" <randy@n344rb.com>
I agree... I'm not sure what the radius of the bend would be from stop to
stop, but I'd bet it's several feet...
Randy
XL Wings - Plans Only
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "kevinbonds" <kevinbonds@comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:45 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "kevinbonds" <kevinbonds@comcast.net>
>
> I doubt you will ever deflect the ailerons far enough to work-harden them.
> The "hinge" does not actually bend (ie stretch). I think it is more akin
> to
> the kind of flex you might get when rolling up your aluminum for storage.
>
> Kevin Bonds
>
> Nashville TN
>
>
> 601XL Plans building.
>
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~kevinbonds
>
>
> do not archive DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MacDonald
> Doug
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 1:15 PM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: MacDonald Doug <dougsnash@yahoo.com>
>
> As a CH-701 builder I'm asking this question out of
> complete ignorance.
>
> Would there not be a tendancy for the aluminum of a
> hingless aileron to work harden at the flex point?
> Admittedly I have not looked closely at the aileron
> attachment on a CH-601 so I can't picture how it
> works. I'm just basing my question on the
> descriptions you guys have given.
>
> Doug MacDonald
> NW Ontario, Canada
> CH-701 Scratch Builder
>
>
> __________________________________________________
>
>
>
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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Bryant" <randy@n344rb.com>
Here's what Chris Heinz says about the hingeless ailerons:
Whereas a hinge has rotating parts (friction, wear and the need to be
lubricated), the "hingeless hinge" has no parts with relative motion because
the deflection is provided by flexing part 'a' (which is an extension of the
aileron skin). If the length 'a' is of the order of 3/4" to 1", the
thickness of the flexing metal being .016", the metal being 6061-T6, and the
deflection of the aileron a maximum of +/- 15 degrees, we can, using
available deflection statistics for recreational airplanes, calculate the
fatigue life of the metal.
It is some 120,000 hours, which, reduced by the safety factor of 8 (usual
when analysis is performed), amounts to 15,000 hours flying time.
Now to be absolutely sure, we also performed fatigue tests. It was easy to
replace the aileron bellcrank with an electric motor and an eccentric moving
the rod and aileron. We had 3 eccentrics for 3 stages of deflection to
reproduce the above mentioned statistics and, knowing that the motor's RPM
is 1700, we get 100,000 cycles per hour (CPM).
In a relatively short period, the cycles from the statistics could be
applied to the deflection of the aileron for an aircraft utilization of
10,000 flying hours. No crack (not even chipped paint) was noticed.
After that, and just to know if by any bad luck it did crack, do I have to
repair it in the field, or can I fly safely home and fix it in the shop? I
cut a 1/8" notch at both inboard and outboard ends of the flex area with
snips and restarted running the tests.
After the equivalent of another 3 hours, the notch had developed into a
crack reaching on one end the first rivet, and on the other end the second
rivet through the wing skin and rear channel. The test was then continued
for the equivalent of another 10,000 flying hours with no further
deterioration.
The conclusions are: The "flex hinge" is adequate for the intended use
(10,000 flying hours, which is an awful lot of time considering that most of
us fly about 50 hours per year; it's 200 years!). Also, if a (very unlikely)
crack would be discovered at the preflight check, you can safely fly home
and then repair it! I know of at least two Zodiacs having logged over 1600
and 2100 hrs. respectively without any problem, so it definitely works!
A conventional hinged aileron adds weight and does not "look as good" as the
maintenance-free hingeless aileron - with its smooth surface and completely
sealed gap.
You can also read this article online at:
http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/ht-aileron.html
Thanks,
Randy
XL Wings - Plans Only
http://www.n344rb.com
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:44 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
>
> I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we
> are flying and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the
> way the aileron is hinged.
>
> That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required to
> roll the plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross country
> you are going to have a lot of trouble picking up individual rivets to
> build the thing.
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54183#54183
>
>
>
Message 36
| 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: Hinge less ailerons -Just The Facts Maam |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: N5SL <nfivesl@yahoo.com>
Good Afternoon Zen-brothers.
Let's all sit around in a circle, hold hands, and take
long, deep breaths (Dr. Ed if you want to sit by me
you will have to clean the wet amalgam off your hands)
and study this sacred Zen-Document written by our
leader Chris Heintz:
http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/ht-aileron.html
It even has a cool, moving-aileron graphic.
Scott Laughlin
Official Zen-Brother/Builder
Omaha, Nebraska
http://www.cooknwithgas.com/8_10_06_Cowl.JPG
DO (breath) NOT (breath) ARCHIVE
--- MacDonald Doug <dougsnash@yahoo.com> wrote:
> As a CH-701 builder I'm asking this question out of
> complete ignorance.
>
> Would there not be a tendancy for the aluminum of a
> hingless aileron to work harden at the flex point?
__________________________________________________
Message 37
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gary Boothe" <gboothe@calply.com>
I'm making a note in my Palm, "Year 2206 - check ailerons." Thanks Randy!
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion
Tail done, wings almost done....(with hingeless ailerons)
Do Not Archive
Here's what Chris Heinz says about the hingeless ailerons:
...The conclusions are: The "flex hinge" is adequate for ... 200 years!.
Randy
XL Wings - Plans Only
http://www.n344rb.com
Do Not Archive
Message 38
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" <John.Hines@craftontull.com>
I never said I didn't trust the design. If you look back at my original
post I asked 2 questions.
1. Does the piano hinge give it better motion?
2. How much weight does it add?
In the demo plane there was definitely a different amount of force
needed for roll compared to pitch. I never said it was excessive, just
that it was different. I'm just asking if the hinge makes a more
uniform feel of the controls. Now I suppose this will go on and on like
scotch brite and Corvair discussions. If you don't have or have never
flown a 601 with a hinge then it is impossible to answer the first
question.
John
John R. Hines
IT Manager
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200
Rogers, AR 72756
Office: 479-878-2449
Mobile: 479-366-4783
Fax: 479-631-6224
John.Hines@craftontull.com
www.craftontull.com
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs
of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
dredmoody@cox.net
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <dredmoody@cox.net>
Good point..... one lister is expressing hesitance to contradict an
experienced flyer who doesn't like the design but seems totally okee
dokee with not trusting Chris Heintz's design and testing experience. Go
figure,
Ed
---- Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@cox.net> wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
>
> I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft
we are flying and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of
the way the aileron is hinged.
>
> That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required
to roll the plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross
country you are going to have a lot of trouble picking up individual
rivets to build the thing.
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54183#54183
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely
for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message
contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named.
If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute
or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have
received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If
you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information
is strictly prohibited.
Message 39
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
FWIW, I have installed hinges on my ailerons. However, it had nothing to do
with the realtive merits of hinged versus hingless. I had already decided to
go with the Zenith design. However, when I went to install the first aileron,
a problem popped up. If I aligned the aileron with the flap, using the
pre-drilled holes in the wing skin, I had about 2mm edge distance on the aileron
skin. I even considered riveting a strip to the aileron edge to stay with the
"flex" hinge. That just didn't sit well with me. In the end, it still required
extra wide hinges to solve the problem.
Jay in Dallas, working on XL fuselage
Message 40
| 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: | Hinge less ailerons -Just The Facts Maam |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
BUT:
- what if you paint it?
- what if you polish it?
- what if you Scotch-Brite it?
- what if there is a Corvair engine near by?
-- Craig it
Message 41
| 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: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
All,
Just did a Google for "hinge".
Found out the exact type Heintz is using.....it is called the "rising butt hinge".
Makes sense.
PLEASE do not archive
Zed
Message 42
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Ron Pizer" <rjp@pizer.org>
I have a factor built 601 with hinged ailerons and notice a bend of the
ailerons on the attachment point of the hinge and aileron in flight. I
would beef up this area if someone was going to use the hinge design. The
aircraft has 150 hours on it and I do fly over the sierras and encounter
rough weather which places a lot of stress on the ailerons. -----Original
Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy Bryant
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Bryant" <randy@n344rb.com>
Here's what Chris Heinz says about the hingeless ailerons:
Whereas a hinge has rotating parts (friction, wear and the need to be
lubricated), the "hingeless hinge" has no parts with relative motion because
the deflection is provided by flexing part 'a' (which is an extension of the
aileron skin). If the length 'a' is of the order of 3/4" to 1", the
thickness of the flexing metal being .016", the metal being 6061-T6, and the
deflection of the aileron a maximum of +/- 15 degrees, we can, using
available deflection statistics for recreational airplanes, calculate the
fatigue life of the metal.
It is some 120,000 hours, which, reduced by the safety factor of 8 (usual
when analysis is performed), amounts to 15,000 hours flying time.
Now to be absolutely sure, we also performed fatigue tests. It was easy to
replace the aileron bellcrank with an electric motor and an eccentric moving
the rod and aileron. We had 3 eccentrics for 3 stages of deflection to
reproduce the above mentioned statistics and, knowing that the motor's RPM
is 1700, we get 100,000 cycles per hour (CPM).
In a relatively short period, the cycles from the statistics could be
applied to the deflection of the aileron for an aircraft utilization of
10,000 flying hours. No crack (not even chipped paint) was noticed.
After that, and just to know if by any bad luck it did crack, do I have to
repair it in the field, or can I fly safely home and fix it in the shop? I
cut a 1/8" notch at both inboard and outboard ends of the flex area with
snips and restarted running the tests.
After the equivalent of another 3 hours, the notch had developed into a
crack reaching on one end the first rivet, and on the other end the second
rivet through the wing skin and rear channel. The test was then continued
for the equivalent of another 10,000 flying hours with no further
deterioration.
The conclusions are: The "flex hinge" is adequate for the intended use
(10,000 flying hours, which is an awful lot of time considering that most of
us fly about 50 hours per year; it's 200 years!). Also, if a (very unlikely)
crack would be discovered at the preflight check, you can safely fly home
and then repair it! I know of at least two Zodiacs having logged over 1600
and 2100 hrs. respectively without any problem, so it definitely works!
A conventional hinged aileron adds weight and does not "look as good" as the
maintenance-free hingeless aileron - with its smooth surface and completely
sealed gap.
You can also read this article online at:
http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/ht-aileron.html
Thanks,
Randy
XL Wings - Plans Only
http://www.n344rb.com
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:44 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
>
> I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we
> are flying and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the
> way the aileron is hinged.
>
> That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required to
> roll the plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross country
> you are going to have a lot of trouble picking up individual rivets to
> build the thing.
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54183#54183
>
>
>
Message 43
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Clyde Barcus" <barcusc@comcast.net>
I have flown both and I really don't think there is much difference. I
bought the hingeless kit but decided to convert it so I discussed this with
Chris Heinz at Sun-N-Fun. I ask Chris about using .025 angle to change it
over, after review he gave it his blessing. Chris is a great guy to talk to,
he understands the different preferences and that is why he offers both
options. I was never concerned about the design, my reason was simple, I
know the day will come when I will sell my plane and move on to land based
toys. I think there is far more potential buyers that would be more
comfortable with the typical hinge type versus hingeless. The controls are a
little heavy but not excessive, but you need to consider most of my flight
time was in a Grumman Tiger which has very light, responsive controls.
Clyde Barcus
601 XL, Corvair Powered
barcusc@comcast.net
DO NOT ARCHIVE
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:44 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
>
> I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we
> are flying and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the
> way the aileron is hinged.
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54183#54183
>
>
>
Message 44
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
The answer to #2 is yes not much but some.
The answer to #1 is Maybe it does now but what about 4 years from now?
John.Hines(at)craftontull wrote:
> I never said I didn't trust the design. If you look back at my original
> post I asked 2 questions.
>
> 1. Does the piano hinge give it better motion?
> 2. How much weight does it add?
>
>
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54228#54228
Message 45
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Edward Moody II" <dredmoody@cox.net>
I may be mistaken but I believe that in the test of the hingeless system, no
cracks developed after 10,000 cycles of 15 degree deflections. They decided
at that point to make a small v-shaped cut in the inboard and outboard edges
of the test piece and run another 10,000 cycles to see if that wold induce
any cracks. That was when the two cracks occured.
Ed Moody II
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:05 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
> Zenith actually did a life test with a motor flexing a sample. It went
> tens
> of thousands of cycles before short cracks appeared at the ends. I think
> they then drilled two stop holes and continued the test. You will die of
> old
> age before this is a real problem.
>
> -- Craig
>
>
>
Message 46
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Edward Moody II" <dredmoody@cox.net>
Oops. My mistake. It was 10,000 simulated flying hours in the test, not
10,000 cycles. I apologize.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:05 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
> Zenith actually did a life test with a motor flexing a sample. It went
> tens
> of thousands of cycles before short cracks appeared at the ends. I think
> they then drilled two stop holes and continued the test. You will die of
> old
> age before this is a real problem.
>
> -- Craig
>
>
>
Message 47
| 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: Hinge less ailerons -Just The Facts Maam |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Edward Moody II" <dredmoody@cox.net>
Will it dissolve when exposed to ETHANOL????
Ed
Do Not Archive
Do Not Continue This Thread Any Longer
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:52 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons -Just The Facts Maam
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
> BUT:
>
> - what if you paint it?
> - what if you polish it?
> - what if you Scotch-Brite it?
> - what if there is a Corvair engine near by?
>
> -- Craig it
Message 48
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
Damn, let it go!!!! Both options will work acceptably well in these airplanes.
Let's get back to the scotch brite. Which color should I be using???
Message 49
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@hotmail.com>
Isn't it odd that ZAC uses piano hinges on their own "Quick-Build" kits. I saw
a kit up close and personal today. Makes you wonder, doesn't it. Just check out
this photo from the ZAC website. Looks like a piano hinge to me.
http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/construction/qbk1.jpg
Dave Clay
Temple, TX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54241#54241
Message 50
| 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: | Hinge less ailerons |
I have heard that the type hinge that is simply a strip of metal
that flexes is as safe as the regular piano hinge however, so many
people expressed doubt and fear as to it's reliability, the ZodiacXL now
has the piano aileron hinge as standard in the kit.
I heard the same complaint about the first Pulsar with the Rotax
582 engine. Most of us have used an out board engine and had to pull
the plugs, clear and reset them very often and the feeling was that this
would be the same in an airplane with the exception being that if the
motor stops in an outboard, you use the oars and row to shore. If this
happens when you are flying along fat, dumb, and happy......Well need I
say more.
Bob Stone, Harker Heights, Tx
ZodiacXL
Message 51
| 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: | Hinge less ailerons |
I wish to offer a small opinion on this issue. Both the hinged and
hingless systems work well, both have merit to their use. When
confronted with this question by a builder I simply ask what do you
envision doing with your plane. Is it primarily for evening use flying
to local fly-ins then opt for the hinged system for a more responsive
snappy system. If you envision going on trips with your Zodiac then
stick to the hingless system. Their really is little deflection
necessary in most flight situations with the Zodiac and often it just
comes down to pressure on the stick for course correction. The hingless
system wishes to remain in a non deflected state allowing for prolonged
hands off flying that you do not get with hinged systems, see why this
is a benefit for longer trips? It allows the pilot more free time to
unfold a paper map in his lap and draw out the flight plan and
corrections( OK now that your all laughing your ass of with the vision
of anyone still using paper maps in a cockpit and not just tuning in the
GPS) But you get the point,
distance flight =hingless
Local flight = hinged
This is just my recommendation and it is just a rule of thumb, neither
is truly better then the other when compared over the whole community of
builders it just depends on what you want to do with the plane that
makes the difference to your choice.
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
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom and
Bren Henderson
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Hinge less ailerons
Damn, let it go!!!! Both options will work acceptably well in these
airplanes. Let's get back to the scotch brite. Which color should I be
using???
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
8/11/2006
--
8/11/2006
Message 52
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Randy Bryant" <randy@n344rb.com>
I'll bet you can order the QB kit either way...
Randy
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 6:25 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@hotmail.com>
>
> Isn't it odd that ZAC uses piano hinges on their own "Quick-Build" kits. I
> saw a kit up close and personal today. Makes you wonder, doesn't it. Just
> check out this photo from the ZAC website. Looks like a piano hinge to me.
>
> http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/construction/qbk1.jpg
>
> Dave Clay
> Temple, TX
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54241#54241
>
>
>
Message 53
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Zodie Rocket" <zodierocket@hsfx.ca>
The QBK is the base for the ELSA and SLSA created by AMD and it didn't
make sense to have various different QBK options so yes you only get
hinges on a QBK but remember most of those planes are used for flight
training, Some days they will never see anything but the circuit. And as
stated in a previous post
short distance - hinged
Traveling - hinge less
Mark Townsend
Can-Zac Aviation Ltd.
president@can-zacaviation.com
www.can-zacaviation.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of TxDave
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 6:25 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@hotmail.com>
Isn't it odd that ZAC uses piano hinges on their own "Quick-Build" kits.
I saw a kit up close and personal today. Makes you wonder, doesn't it.
Just check out this photo from the ZAC website. Looks like a piano hinge
to me.
http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/construction/qbk1.jpg
Dave Clay
Temple, TX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54241#54241
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
8/11/2006
--
8/11/2006
Message 54
| 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: Rudder skin bending technique |
The stab can be done by one person, but I scrapped one before getting it
right. I finally did it by screwing stop blocks on my table. Just to
keep the edges square- not to hold anything down other than with duct
tape.
Bill Naumuk
40%HDS
Townville, Pa
----- Original Message -----
From: Tom and Bren Henderson
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Rudder skin bending technique
I hate to say it, but that's the best method unless you have
access to a hydraulic press brake. I had good luck using an 1/8" top
punch in a .472" acute bottom die. I was only able to hit a 30 degree
included angle, but it was close. Add a little pressure from a 2X4
(there's no getting away from that 2X4!), and it was a beautiful looking
rudder skin.
I used the table and 2X4 method for the Horizontal Tail skin, due
to the larger radius. I got good results, but it's IMPERATIVE that you
apply even pressure ALL along the full length to avoid smiles in the
material. (Yeah, I went through two Horizontal Tail skins too. lol) A
second person makes the job much easier, IF they understand they need to
take their time. Inform them ahead of time that their impatience may
cost them $100 for a new skin.
Larry Winger <larrywinger@gmail.com> wrote:
As a 601XL scratch builder, I'm looking for guidance on bending my
rudder skins. I have watched the "Scratch Building Basics" DVDs and
will use their technique unless I hear differently from the list.
In case you don't know, they do the following:
Trailing edge skin -- They start the bend in the bending brake
(which I have). They then move it to the worktable and complete the
bend with even pressure on a 2x4. They bring it to a fairly sharp bend
(presumably without exceeding a minimum radius).
Leading edge skin -- They bring the ends together on the top of the
worktable, and produce a smooth and broadly curved nose by gently
applying pressure on the 2x4.
Based on your experience, what works the best? Sorry if I missed a
similar discussion in the archives.
Larry Winger
Tustin, CA
Scratch building 601XL
Message 55
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
You are installing a Corvair engine and are worried about resale for the
aileron hinges????
In a message dated 8/11/2006 5:15:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
barcusc@comcast.net writes:
I have flown both and I really don't think there is much difference. I
bought the hingeless kit but decided to convert it so I discussed this with
Chris Heinz at Sun-N-Fun. I ask Chris about using .025 angle to change it
over, after review he gave it his blessing. Chris is a great guy to talk to,
he understands the different preferences and that is why he offers both
options. I was never concerned about the design, my reason was simple, I
know the day will come when I will sell my plane and move on to land based
toys. I think there is far more potential buyers that would be more
comfortable with the typical hinge type versus hingeless. The controls are a
Message 56
| 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 |
|
OK, all you HD and HDS builders, how many clecos does it really take
to build through the fuselage stage? I finally get back to work on the
project this weekend after nearly a 5 month layoff building the
garanger, (I'm only a month off schedule!!) and my cleco cans are pretty
low.
If I leave off riveting the center wing per the manual until later,
I'm out a pile of clecos. But, thanks to the benefits of painful
experience, I realize spending $100 on clecos is better than God knows
how much time and money rebuilding a warped Center Wing. The puppy's
nearly perfect, and at this point I'm pretty gun-shy.
Bill Naumuk
40%HDS
Townville, Pa
Message 57
| 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: "Zodie Rocket" <zodierocket@hsfx.ca>
Sorry group I lost Jim Pensingers E-Mail address. Jim please send me a
note privately to cdngoose@hsfx.ca
Mark Townsend
Can-Zac Aviation Ltd.
president@can-zacaviation.com
www.can-zacaviation.com
do not archive
--
8/11/2006
Message 58
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
OH NO, you did NOT just start that up again did you?! : ) Oh, and for what
it's worth, you'll get as much for a well built XL with a Corvair as you would
for a Jab, minus the difference in engine costs. Which means....YOU'LL MAKE
THE SAME AMOUNT WHEN YOU SELL A CORVAIR POWERED PLANE AS YOU WILL WHEN YOU SELL
A JABIRU POWERED PLANE (give or take a bit.)
That ten thousand dollar difference in price is easily made up in the fact
that it cost thousands less to get it in the air. Oh, not to mention the fact
that some people swear by them, not at them. One more time as a group..."TO
EACH THEIR OWN!"
NYTerminat@aol.com wrote: You are installing a Corvair engine and are worried
about resale for the aileron hinges????
In a message dated 8/11/2006 5:15:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, barcusc@comcast.net
writes:
I have flown both and I really don't think there is much difference. I
bought the hingeless kit but decided to convert it so I discussed this with
Chris Heinz at Sun-N-Fun. I ask Chris about using .025 angle to change it
over, after review he gave it his blessing. Chris is a great guy to talk to,
he understands the different preferences and that is why he offers both
options. I was never concerned about the design, my reason was simple, I
know the day will come when I will sell my plane and move on to land based
toys. I think there is far more potential buyers that would be more
comfortable with the typical hinge type versus hingeless. The controls are a
Message 59
| 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: | Hinge less ailerons / Corvair - resale |
Makes sense to me. I believe the Corvair is especially noted for being
econonical to maintain and overhaul (at the outside, all moving parts
can be replaced for $1500 as I recall), hence a great selling point. On
the other hand, any potential buyer not familiar with the hingeless
system is likely to be very skeptical.
----- Original Message -----
From: NYTerminat@aol.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
You are installing a Corvair engine and are worried about resale for
the aileron hinges????
Message 60
| 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: | 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas |
I'm dropping my youngest off at college next week and am eagerly
anticipating accelerating from my glacial pace to one that is more snail
like. This will clearly require the 12' x 4' bench. I've seen the bench
plans on ch701.com and the zenith site but would like to know what has
worked well for other 701 scratch builders.
Do Not Archive
Bob Percival
701 from plans
Berthoud CO
Message 61
| 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: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Ron Lendon" <rlendon@comcast.net>
I'm not building a 701, 601XL actually but have found the plans from to work real
well for me.
The picture at the forum shows me standing on the table using it as a stomp press.
It's still flat and straight but has a lot more holes in it now (pilot drilling
and fixturing).
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
Corvair Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54270#54270
Message 62
| 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 |
|
Bill,
At our Basic Sheet Metal Workshop at SunNFun we teach that Clecoes alone
don't completely hold critical structures in alighnment. I always urge
builders to use at least a few critically located clamps to maintain
important alighnment. This is true especially after all deburring and
prep is complete and riveting is about to begin. If your have a wing
laying on a table with clecoes in every other hole, I can lift one
corner of the wing off the table if your firmly hold the oppisite
corner. Ask me how I know that you can build a warped wing this way!
With proper clamping, you can remove many of the clecoes and use them
elsewhere in your construction process. Of course there is nothing wrong
with having a clecoe in every other hole when you are riveting, but if
the structure isn't properly aligned AND CLAMPED it will come out
warped. Again, ask me how I know!
Good luck and build straight!
Jim Hoak- 601HD- Rotax 912 UL- 525 hours
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Naumuk
To: zenith list
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 7:19 PM
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Zenith-List: Clecos
OK, all you HD and HDS builders, how many clecos does it really
take to build through the fuselage stage? I finally get back to work on
the project this weekend after nearly a 5 month layoff building the
garanger, (I'm only a month off schedule!!) and my cleco cans are pretty
low.
If I leave off riveting the center wing per the manual until
later, I'm out a pile of clecos. But, thanks to the benefits of painful
experience, I realize spending $100 on clecos is better than God knows
how much time and money rebuilding a warped Center Wing. The puppy's
nearly perfect, and at this point I'm pretty gun-shy.
Bill Naumuk
40%HDS
Townville, Pa
Message 63
| 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 |
|
Remember Bill, a can full of clecos is like money in the bank. They
hold their value pretty well, and there is always another needy builder
coming along.
George
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Naumuk
To: zenith list
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 4:19 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Clecos
OK, all you HD and HDS builders, how many clecos does it really
take to build through the fuselage stage? I finally get back to work on
the project this weekend after nearly a 5 month layoff building the
garanger, (I'm only a month off schedule!!) and my cleco cans are pretty
low.
If I leave off riveting the center wing per the manual until
later, I'm out a pile of clecos. But, thanks to the benefits of painful
experience, I realize spending $100 on clecos is better than God knows
how much time and money rebuilding a warped Center Wing. The puppy's
nearly perfect, and at this point I'm pretty gun-shy.
Bill Naumuk
40%HDS
Townville, Pa
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
No virus found in this incoming message.
8/10/2006
Message 64
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
AMEN TOM!!!!
Larry Husky
Lakeview, OR
601XL / Corvair
Building Fuse
Do Not Archive
Message 65
| 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: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas |
Bob, I am not a scratch builder, but we all need the 4' x 12' table. I built
the frame for mine with lumber yard 2 x 6s. I thought they were pretty
straight, but found out later that they were not straight and were twisted. This
makes one have to do a lot of minute shimming to get things level both ways. If
I had it to do over, I would certainly not use lumber yard lumber. There is
a section on Builders Resources about building a table structure with
composite beams, made of lumber and plywood. That would assure a flatter finished
top
surface. That's the way I would go.
Jay in Dallas, working on XL fuselage
Message 66
| 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: | Hinge less ailerons |
Hey! Wait a minute.Why, I oughta...
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion
Tail done, wings almost done....
Do not archive!
.. ( OK now that your all laughing your ass of with the vision of anyone
still using paper maps in a cockpit and not just tuning in the GPS)
Mark Townsend
Can-Zac Aviation Ltd.
president@can-zacaviation.com
www.can-zacaviation.com <http://www.can-zacaviation.com/>
--
8/11/2006
Message 67
| 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: Rudder skin bending technique |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Ron Lendon" <rlendon@comcast.net>
I made mine without a brake by starting with a rectangle and folding it like paper.
Hold the edges and bend it to a stop for the radius.
Here is a link showing how:
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
Corvair Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54278#54278
Message 68
| 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: Carlos Sa <carlosfsa@yahoo.com>
Something that has worked for me is to insert the tail (smooth) end of old drill
bits in some of
the holes, to ensure parts remain aligned. A piece of masking tape on the drill
bit will help
keeping them in place (they tend to sneak away when you are not looking).
Carlos
CH601-HD, plans
Montreal, Canada
--- Jim Hoak <planejim@bellsouth.net> a crit :
> Bill,
>
> At our Basic Sheet Metal Workshop at SunNFun we teach that Clecoes alone don't
completely hold
> critical structures in alighnment. I always urge builders to use at least a few
critically
> located clamps to maintain important alighnment. This is true especially after
all deburring
> and prep is complete and riveting is about to begin. If your have a wing laying
on a table with
> clecoes in every other hole, I can lift one corner of the wing off the table
if your firmly
> hold the oppisite corner. Ask me how I know that you can build a warped wing
this way!
>
> With proper clamping, you can remove many of the clecoes and use them elsewhere
in your
> construction process. Of course there is nothing wrong with having a clecoe in
every other hole
> when you are riveting, but if the structure isn't properly aligned AND CLAMPED
it will come out
> warped. Again, ask me how I know!
>
> Good luck and build straight!
>
> Jim Hoak- 601HD- Rotax 912 UL- 525 hours
>
p5.vert.ukl.yahoo.com uncompressed/chunked Sat Aug 12 00:23:37 GMT 2006
__________________________________________________________
Message 69
| 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: | 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas |
I have a few photos of my table construction here:
http://home.comcast.net/~kevinbonds/Worktable.htm
I followed someone's plans. It is perfect for me.
Kevin Bonds
Nashville TN
601XL Corvair powered; Plans building.
Empennage done; working on wings and engine.
<http://home.comcast.net/~kevinbonds> http://home.comcast.net/~kevinbonds
do not archive DO NOT ARCHIVE
_____
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Percival
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 6:53 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas
I'm dropping my youngest off at college next week and am eagerly
anticipating accelerating from my glacial pace to one that is more snail
like. This will clearly require the 12' x 4' bench. I've seen the bench
plans on ch701.com and the zenith site but would like to know what has
worked well for other 701 scratch builders.
Do Not Archive
Bob Percival
701 from plans
Berthoud CO
Message 70
| 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: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@hotmail.com>
Hey Bob,
I started out with an 8 foot table and extended it to 12 foot when I got to my
wing spars. Whatever frame design you use, the 3/4 MDF works great as a table
top. You can easily drill and cleco parts directly to the table.
Dave Clay
Temple, TX
601XL scratch builder
http://www.daves601xl.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54285#54285
Message 71
| 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: Rudder skin bending technique |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "lwinger" <larrywinger@gmail.com>
Ron,
What stop did you use? I see no reference in the plans to the radius.
--------
Larry Winger
Tustin, CA
601XL #6493 from scratch
Building stabilizer & rudder parts
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54286#54286
Message 72
| 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: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "lwinger" <larrywinger@gmail.com>
Bob,
After a fair amount of web searching, I settled on a table based on the design of Gary Liming (www.liming.org/ch801/). His plan uses laminated I-beams for strength and straightness. In reality, they cost about the same as the component parts, and are a whole lot less work. For reference, the ones I ordered from Lowe's are Boise Cascade BCI 6000 2-5/16" x 9-1/2" x 12'. Three of them, running lengthwise, provide adequate support for the 4' x 12' table needed to construct the plane. The beams are held together (and straight) with plywood end caps. The surface I used was a layer of 3/4" CDX plywood topped with a 3/4" layer of MDF. I also left 6" of overhang on all sides for clamping. Good luck.
--------
Larry Winger
Tustin, CA
601XL #6493 from scratch
Building stabilizer & rudder parts
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54287#54287
Message 73
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
I already considered your point, lets face it, that is a valid concern.
After a lot of thought I decided if it doesn't sell I will sell it
without the engine or replace it with a Lycoming or Continental and
raise the price. I enjoy working on engines, building stock cars, you
name it, changing engines is not a big deal, actually, I probably enjoy
building more than flying. I am sure I could sell the Corvair to someone
who likes to save money. On another note, I realize there is an
anti-auto conversion crowd out there but I already know flying is not
the safest hobby, my Lycoming quit in my Tiger (Look it up, N4519B), it
was determined to be Lycomings fault and I was eventually reimbursed
although it cost me thousands to get it back in the air. I also lost two
friends, guess how, the crankshaft broke on their 210, of course it was
a certified engine but they are still dead. Bottom line, flying is not
as safe as walking but who in the hell wants to walk.
Clyde Barcus
601XL Corvair Powered
DO NOT ARCHIVE
From: NYTerminat@aol.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
You are installing a Corvair engine and are worried about resale for
the aileron hinges????
In a message dated 8/11/2006 5:15:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
barcusc@comcast.net writes:
I have flown both and I really don't think there is much difference.
I
bought the hingeless kit but decided to convert it so I discussed
this with
Chris Heinz at Sun-N-Fun. I ask Chris about using .025 angle to
change it
over, after review he gave it his blessing. Chris is a great guy to
talk to,
he understands the different preferences and that is why he offers
both
options. I was never concerned about the design, my reason was
simple, I
know the day will come when I will sell my plane and move on to land
based
toys. I think there is far more potential buyers that would be more
comfortable with the typical hinge type versus hingeless. The
controls are a
Message 74
| 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: "Paul Moore" <pmoore505@msn.com>
Ah Zed, once again you come through with the very best in subtle humor......
Still laughing,
Paul
XL - O200
----- Original Message -----
>
> Just did a Google for "hinge".
> Found out the exact type Heintz is using.....it is called the "rising butt
> hinge".
>
> Makes sense.
>
> PLEASE do not archive
>
> Zed
Message 75
| 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: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas |
Yep... I agree... Here's my table made with 2X6's and an MDF top... It
works really well..
Randy
XL Wings - Plans Only
http://www.n344rb.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:49 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@hotmail.com>
>
> Hey Bob,
>
> I started out with an 8 foot table and extended it to 12 foot when I got
> to my wing spars. Whatever frame design you use, the 3/4 MDF works great
> as a table top. You can easily drill and cleco parts directly to the
> table.
>
> Dave Clay
> Temple, TX
> 601XL scratch builder
>
> http://www.daves601xl.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54285#54285
>
>
>
Message 76
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
Dear lord, I apologize for starting this thread. From now on I will
just stick to "Polish vs. Paint".
At Corvair day in Mexico a few months ago there was a guy building a
Long EZ with a funny story. Someone in his family freaked out that he
was building a "John Denver plane". When he decided to put a Corvair
engine on it the same family member said "You mean a Ralph Nader
engine?". He answered "Yes, I'm putting a Ralph Nader engine on a John
Denver plane!" He said he loves to tell people that just to freak them
out. It was so funny I just had to share.
Ya'll have a good weekend!
John
www.johnsplane.com <http://www.johnsplane.com/>
________________________________
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clyde
Barcus
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
I already considered your point, lets face it, that is a valid concern.
After a lot of thought I decided if it doesn't sell I will sell it
without the engine or replace it with a Lycoming or Continental and
raise the price. I enjoy working on engines, building stock cars, you
name it, changing engines is not a big deal, actually, I probably enjoy
building more than flying. I am sure I could sell the Corvair to someone
who likes to save money. On another note, I realize there is an
anti-auto conversion crowd out there but I already know flying is not
the safest hobby, my Lycoming quit in my Tiger (Look it up, N4519B), it
was determined to be Lycomings fault and I was eventually reimbursed
although it cost me thousands to get it back in the air. I also lost two
friends, guess how, the crankshaft broke on their 210, of course it was
a certified engine but they are still dead. Bottom line, flying is not
as safe as walking but who in the hell wants to walk.
Clyde Barcus
601XL Corvair Powered
DO NOT ARCHIVE
From: NYTerminat@aol.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less ailerons
You are installing a Corvair engine and are worried about resale
for the aileron hinges????
In a message dated 8/11/2006 5:15:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
barcusc@comcast.net writes:
I have flown both and I really don't think there is much
difference. I
bought the hingeless kit but decided to convert it so I
discussed this with
Chris Heinz at Sun-N-Fun. I ask Chris about using .025
angle to change it
over, after review he gave it his blessing. Chris is a
great guy to talk to,
he understands the different preferences and that is why
he offers both
options. I was never concerned about the design, my
reason was simple, I
know the day will come when I will sell my plane and
move on to land based
toys. I think there is far more potential buyers that
would be more
comfortable with the typical hinge type versus
hingeless. The controls are a
John R. Hines
IT Manager
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.
901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200
Rogers, AR 72756
Office: 479-878-2449
Mobile: 479-366-4783
Fax: 479-631-6224
John.Hines@craftontull.com
www.craftontull.com
Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the
needs of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the
system manager. This message contains confidential information and is
intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named
addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this
e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are
not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited.
<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml"
xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html;
charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="country-region"/>
<o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PersonName"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue
id="role_body"
bottomMargin=7 leftmargin=7 topmargin=7 rightMargin=7>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Dear lord, I apologize for starting
this
thread. From now on I will just stick to “Polish vs.
Paint”.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>At Corvair day in
<st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Mexico</st1:place></st1:country-region> a few
months ago there was a guy building a Long EZ with a funny story.
Someone
in his family freaked out that he was building a “John Denver
plane”.
When he decided to put a Corvair engine on it the same family member
said “You
mean a Ralph Nader engine?”. He answered “Yes,
I’m
putting a Ralph Nader engine on a John Denver plane!” He
said he
loves to tell people that just to freak them out. It was so funny
I just
had to share.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Ya’ll have a good
weekend!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>John<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><a
href="http://www.johnsplane.com/">www.johnsplane.com</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font
size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<BR><BR><DIV align=left><TABLE height 0 cellSpacing=0
cellPadding=0 width=400 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD
style="BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat" align=left
width="100%"><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%"
border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt;
COLOR: #000000; MARGIN-RIGHT: 10px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Verdana"
align=left>John R. Hines</TD></TR><TR><TD style="FONT-WEIGHT:
normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; MARGIN-RIGHT: 10px;
FONT-FAMILY: Arial" align=left>IT Manager</TD></TR><TR><TD
style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 8pt; COLOR: #767374;
MARGIN-RIGHT: 10px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
align=left>John.Hines@craftontull.com</TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle
height=10></TD></TR><TR><TD style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE:
8pt; COLOR: #767374; MARGIN-RIGHT: 10px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
align=left><br/>
Office: 479-878-2449 <br/>
Mobile: 479-366-4783 <br/>
Fax: 479-631-6224 </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle
height=10></TD></TR><TR><TD style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE:
7pt; COLOR: #767374; MARGIN-RIGHT: 10px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
align=right><A
href="http://www.craftontull.com/">www.craftontull.com</A></TD></TR><TR
><TD style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 7pt; COLOR: #767374;
MARGIN-RIGHT: 10px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial" align=right>901 N. 47th
Street, Suite 200 ·Rogers, AR 72756</TD></TR><TR><TD align=right
height=40><A title="Visit our website for more information."
style="TEXT-DECORATION: none" href="http://www.craftontull.com/"
target=_blank><IMG
src="http://www.craftontull.com/images/emailsignature_block1.gif"
border=0></A></TD></TR><TR><TD style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal;
FONT-SIZE: 8pt; COLOR: #767374; MARGIN-RIGHT: 10px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
align=justify>Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to
anticipate and understand the needs of our clients and provide them with
successful
solutions.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></DIV><hr
size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Clyde
Barcus<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Friday, August 11,
2006 7:07
PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> <st1:PersonName
w:st="on">zenith-list@matronics.com</st1:PersonName><br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: Zenith-List:
Re:
Hinge less ailerons</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'>I already considered your point,
lets
face it, that is a valid concern. After a lot of thought I
decided if it
doesn't sell I will sell it without the engine or replace it with
a Lycoming or Continental and raise the price. I enjoy working on
engines,
building stock cars, you name it, changing engines is not a big deal,
actually,
I probably enjoy building more than flying. I am sure I could sell
the
Corvair to someone who likes to save money. On another note, I realize
there is
an anti-auto conversion crowd out there but I already know
flying is
not the safest hobby, my Lycoming quit in my Tiger (Look it up,
N4519B),
it was determined to be Lycomings fault and I was eventually reimbursed
although it cost me thousands to get it back in the air. I
also lost
two friends, guess how, the crankshaft broke on their 210, of course it
was a
certified engine but they are still dead. Bottom line, flying is
not as
safe as walking but who in the hell wants to walk.
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><st1:place w:st="on"><font size=2 color=black
face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'>Clyde</span></fo
nt></st1:place><font
size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:black'> Barcus<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'>601XL Corvair
Powered<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'>DO NOT
ARCHIVE<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black;font-weight:bold'
>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:black'> <a href="mailto:NYTerminat@aol.com"
title="NYTerminat@aol.com">NYTerminat@aol.com</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid black
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;
margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'
>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black;font-weight:bold'
>To:</span></font></b><font
size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:black'> <a href="mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com"
title="zenith-list@matronics.com">zenith-list@matronics.com</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black;font-weight:bold'
>Sent:</span></font></b><font
size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:black'> Friday, August 11, 2006 7:16
PM<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black;font-weight:bold'
>Subject:</span></font></b><font
size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:black'> Re: Zenith-List: Re: Hinge less
ailerons<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><strong><b><font size=2 color=red face=Arial
id="role_document"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:red'>You
are installing a Corvair engine and are worried about resale for the
aileron
hinges????</span></font></b></strong><font size=2 color=black
face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'><o:p></o:p></spa
n></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'>In a message dated 8/11/2006
5:15:45 P.M.
Eastern Daylight Time, <a
href="mailto:barcusc@comcast.net">barcusc@comcast.net</a>
writes:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;
margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'>I have flown both and I really
don't
think there is much difference. I <br>
bought the hingeless kit but decided to convert it so I discussed this
with <br>
Chris Heinz at Sun-N-Fun. I ask Chris about using .025 angle to change
it <br>
over, after review he gave it his blessing. Chris is a great guy to talk
to, <br>
he understands the different preferences and that is why he offers both
<br>
options. I was never concerned about the design, my reason was simple, I
<br>
know the day will come when I will sell my plane and move on to land
based <br>
toys. I think there is far more potential buyers that would be more <br>
comfortable with the typical hinge type versus hingeless. The controls
are a <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<BR><BR><FONT style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 8pt;
MARGIN-RIGHT: 10px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial" align="justify">This email and
any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for
the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended
recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or
taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is
strictly prohibited.</FONT></body>
</html>
Message 77
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Peter Chapman <pchapman@ionsys.com>
I went to hinged ailerons on the 601 HDS after trying out the
hingeless on another 601.
In cruising flight, the hingeless ones were nice enough and not a distraction.
But on approach I found it had poor control harmony. There were light
pitch forces combined with somewhat heavy roll forces when using a
lot of aileron, such as when dealing with turbulence on approach.
While control harmony isn't perfect with the hinged ailerons, I like
the overall feel better.
Peter Chapman
Toronto, ON
Message 78
| 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 inside cover of Kit Planes |
The back inside cover of the September issue of Kit Planes has a nice
photo of a 701 and the proud owner / builder. (who is probably reading
this).....
Ya know, the 601 is sweet, fast and sexy looking, but the 701 is like
an old comfortable shoe....slip it on ever so easy.....easy in and out.
The 601 is a little more demanding to get in and out of ....but it is
such a looker....
Anyone else choose the 701 over the 601 for such reasons?? I am in the
looking/dreaming stage at this time.
Bill in Central Florida
Message 79
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
John
Hinge vs. no hinge is going to be a personal preference. I have the hinge less
design on my HD. For the most part they are a non-issue. Simple design for the
builder, and they work well in flight. There is just about no chance of them
failing in your lifetime and if they did, you would have lots of warning. It would
take a long time for a crack to propagate far enough to be an inflight problem.
There have only been a couple of times when I had thought it would be better to
have the hinge. Strong crosswind takeoffs and landings is one. You normally start
out with full aileron, so you have to lean on the stick a little harder than
you would if you had the hinge. It's not really a big deal. You know you have
to pull a little harder on the stick, so you do it. The other was when I
made my emergency landing in a field. It would have been nice to pull off the
ailerons just to help protect them better when we trailed the plane back to my
airport.
Bottom line for me, I would not change them out now. And if I were building new
wings, I still think I would still go hinge less.
Randy Stout
San Antonio, TX
n282rs"at"earthlink.net
www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21
Message 80
| 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 inside cover of Kit Planes |
Bill,
I got a 701 so I could keep it at home and fly out of my pasture.
Chuck D.
N701TX
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: allpro2@bellsouth.net
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 9:58 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Back inside cover of Kit Planes
The back inside cover of the September issue of Kit Planes has a nice
photo of a 701 and the proud owner / builder. (who is probably reading
this).....
Ya know, the 601 is sweet, fast and sexy looking, but the 701 is like
an old comfortable shoe....slip it on ever so easy.....easy in and out.
The 601 is a little more demanding to get in and out of ....but it is
such a looker....
Anyone else choose the 701 over the 601 for such reasons?? I am in
the looking/dreaming stage at this time.
Bill in Central Florida
Message 81
| 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: Hinge less ailerons |
Just playing with you, Your analogy will probably be correct and I will look
to see more Corvairs in the sky. :)
In a message dated 8/11/2006 7:34:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
admin@arachnidrobotics.com writes:
OH NO, you did NOT just start that up again did you?! : ) Oh, and for what
it's worth, you'll get as much for a well built XL with a Corvair as you
would for a Jab, minus the difference in engine costs. Which means....YOU'LL
MAKE THE SAME AMOUNT WHEN YOU SELL A CORVAIR POWERED PLANE AS YOU WILL WHEN YOU
SELL A JABIRU POWERED PLANE (give or take a bit.)
That ten thousand dollar difference in price is easily made up in the fact
that it cost thousands less to get it in the air. Oh, not to mention the fact
that some people swear by them, not at them. One more time as a group..."TO
EACH THEIR OWN!"
NYTerminat@aol.com wrote:
You are installing a Corvair engine and are worried about resale for the
aileron hinges????
do not archive
Message 82
| 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 inside cover of Kit Planes |
Bill,
Ditto for me, I fly out of my back yard, would like to build a bigger and
faster plane but the selection is limited because of my short runway.
Bob Spudis
N701ZX CH701/912S
In a message dated 8/11/2006 11:41:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
cffd@pgrb.com writes:
Bill,
I got a 701 so I could keep it at home and fly out of my pasture.
Chuck D.
N701TX
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: _allpro2@bellsouth.net_ (mailto:allpro2@bellsouth.net)
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 9:58 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Back inside cover of Kit Planes
The back inside cover of the September issue of Kit Planes has a nice photo
of a 701 and the proud owner / builder. (who is probably reading this).....
Ya know, the 601 is sweet, fast and sexy looking, but the 701 is like an
old comfortable shoe....slip it on ever so easy.....easy in and out. The 601
is a little more demanding to get in and out of ....but it is such a looker....
Anyone else choose the 701 over the 601 for such reasons?? I am in the
looking/dreaming stage at this time.
Bill in Central Florida
Message 83
| 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: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bob Percival" <bob@frontrange-pc.com>
Thanks everybody - as usual, lots of good solutions!
Do Not Archive
Bob Percival
701 from plans
Berthoud CO
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy
Bryant
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 7:47 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas
Yep... I agree... Here's my table made with 2X6's and an MDF top... It
works really well..
Randy
XL Wings - Plans Only
http://www.n344rb.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:49 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 12' x 4' Workbench Ideas
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "TxDave" <dclaytx2@hotmail.com>
>
> Hey Bob,
>
> I started out with an 8 foot table and extended it to 12 foot when I
got
> to my wing spars. Whatever frame design you use, the 3/4 MDF works
great
> as a table top. You can easily drill and cleco parts directly to the
> table.
>
> Dave Clay
> Temple, TX
> 601XL scratch builder
>
> http://www.daves601xl.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54285#54285
>
>
>
Message 84
| 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: | sourcing .25" angle for Dave Clay's brake press |
I've been shopping around for angle for this brake but haven't had much
luck finding 8' pieces. Further, the 4' pieces I've found at Lowe's go
for about twenty five bucks. Any suggestions where to locate this stuff?
Thanks in advance!
Do Not Archive
Bob Percival
701 from plans
Berthoud CO
Message 85
| 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: | worktable-laminated I-beams |
I too built my work table from laminated I-beams and I was very
satisfied with the result. I used two 12 foot beams for the
longitudinal members and a third for the end members and center cross
member. I think I only had two inches of overhang on the top. Using
some of the packing crate plywood, I made a small shelf and attached it
to the lower edge of the longitudinal beams to hold small tools, drill
bits, Sharpie markers etc.
Each leg was made from two pieces of 3/4 plywood screwed to a 2x2. I
used threaded inserts on the foot of the legs with bolts for leveling.
I thought that I would need a leg at the midpoint of the longitudinal
beams, but the beams didn't sag in the middle at all. Most of the
assembly was done using the drywall screws from the packing crate.
The work surface was two pieces of 3/4 plywood spliced on the center
cross member. I laid out a centerline and several cross reference lines
with a Sharpie marker to help in lining up large structural assemblies.
A 50 by 50mm grid would have been even better.
Best of all, when it came time to set the fuselage down on the gear I
sold the table to another homebuilder for most of what I had invested.
George
Message 86
| 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 inside cover of Kit Planes |
Bill,
I'm a clear weather low and slow kind of guy so the not so snappy 701
cruise doesn't bother me. I also like the fact that the wings can be
detached as I am building in one bay of a two car garage. I prefer high
wing a/c for sight seeing. There are many short unimproved fields in my
area and I expect the 701 will be wonderful for visiting these.
Finally, sniff, I have to use training wheels so my STOL options are
limited.
PLEASE Do Not Archive
Bob Percival
701 from plans
Berthoud CO
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
allpro2@bellsouth.net
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:58 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Back inside cover of Kit Planes
The back inside cover of the September issue of Kit Planes has a nice
photo of a 701 and the proud owner / builder. (who is probably reading
this).....
Ya know, the 601 is sweet, fast and sexy looking, but the 701 is like
an old comfortable shoe....slip it on ever so easy.....easy in and out.
The 601 is a little more demanding to get in and out of ....but it is
such a looker....
Anyone else choose the 701 over the 601 for such reasons?? I am in the
looking/dreaming stage at this time.
Bill in Central Florida
Message 87
| 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: sourcing .25" angle for Dave Clay's brake press |
I'd be surprised if your answer is found in a "big box" home improvement
store. I had to do something I almost never do since discovering the
wonders of Google: I actually pulled out the Yellow Pages (remember
those!?) By looking under "Metal" I found an industrial metal supplier.
You might also look under metal fabrication, given them a call, and ask
where you can buy the needed stock. A little sleuthing by phone should save
you some dollars.
Larry Winger
On 8/11/06, Bob Percival <bob@frontrange-pc.com> wrote:
>
> the 4' pieces I've found at Lowe's go for about twenty five bucks. Any
> suggestions where to locate this stuff?
>
Message 88
| 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: sourcing .25" angle for Dave Clay's brake press |
Nearly every fabrication shop can order the material for you as well. You'll
pay their mark-up, but it's almost always cheaper than your shipping would
be (they get it delivered for free).
Anyone in the NW corner of Oregon should feel free to call me if they need
material. Anything you need to build the XL is either in our shop, or I can get
it for you. Pricing? Might be better, might be worse than Aircraft Spruce.
It just depends on the item.
Also, Coast Aluminum has recently moved into the Portland area. They've got
.032 and .040 4x12 6061-T6 sheets at about $125 will-call if youpurchase in
quantity. For another 22 cents a square foot you'll get it Vinyl clad for protection.
If you look at Aircraft spruces updated pricing, that's not a bad deal
since you're not paying to ship it.
Larry Winger <larrywinger@gmail.com> wrote: I'd be surprised if your answer is
found in a "big box" home improvement store. I had to do something I almost never
do since discovering the wonders of Google: I actually pulled out the Yellow
Pages (remember those!?) By looking under "Metal" I found an industrial metal
supplier. You might also look under metal fabrication, given them a call,
and ask where you can buy the needed stock. A little sleuthing by phone should
save you some dollars.
Larry Winger
On 8/11/06, Bob Percival <bob@frontrange-pc.com> wrote: the 4' pieces I've
found at Lowe's go for about twenty five bucks. Any suggestions where to locate
this stuff?
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! --
|