Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:35 AM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
2. 03:36 AM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Clive Richards)
3. 03:44 AM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Trainnut01@aol.com)
4. 04:40 AM - Re: 'Copter (Zed Smith)
5. 04:40 AM - Re: canopie sources (george may)
6. 04:56 AM - 'Copter Training (Robin Bellach)
7. 04:56 AM - Re: picture of the day + question (Gary Boothe)
8. 06:47 AM - Aileron forces? (Dr. Andrew Elliott)
9. 07:38 AM - "Jabiru engines" from Avweb.com (R.P.)
10. 08:20 AM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
11. 08:31 AM - Re: Zenith-List Digest: First Flight (John M. Goodings)
12. 09:17 AM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Trainnut01@aol.com)
13. 09:40 AM - First flight - crew??? (Jeff Small)
14. 09:51 AM - Re: Zenairs & Snow, (Samm Munn)
15. 10:09 AM - Re: 601HD accident (Samm Munn)
16. 10:43 AM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (JOHN STARN)
17. 11:21 AM - Re: "Jabiru engines" from Avweb.com (Craig Payne)
18. 01:04 PM - Re: First flight - crew??? (Juan Vega)
19. 01:08 PM - Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Noel Loveys)
20. 01:22 PM - Re: Zenairs & Snow, (Juan Vega)
21. 02:07 PM - Re: canopie sources ()
22. 02:08 PM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Noel Loveys)
23. 02:22 PM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Noel Loveys)
24. 02:34 PM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Craig Payne)
25. 02:39 PM - Re: Re: Basic Battery Wiring (Noel Loveys)
26. 02:45 PM - More basic battery explosion (Zed Smith)
27. 02:47 PM - Re: Zenairs & Snow, (Noel Loveys)
28. 03:22 PM - Re: 601HD accident (Steve Hulland)
29. 04:14 PM - Re: Zenairs & Snow, (Craig Payne)
30. 04:42 PM - Re: Zenairs & Snow, (Zodie Rocket)
31. 04:42 PM - Re: Zenairs & Snow, (Juan Vega)
32. 05:32 PM - Re: 701 headset jacks location? (RayStL)
33. 05:32 PM - Re: Zenairs & Snow, (Juan Vega)
34. 07:25 PM - Re: canopie sources (leinad)
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: Basic Battery Wiring |
In a message dated 10/30/2006 1:08:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jhstarn@verizon.net writes:
Master contactor = continuous
Starter Relay = intermittent
Starter Solenoid = intermittent
Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck .... still might
not be a duck
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Basic Battery Wiring |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Clive Richards" <s.c.richards@homecall.co.uk>
Doug
I have put the Master Contactor Adjacent to the battery especially as it is
in the rear of aircraft & fed the starter solenoid through this. The
essential supplies bus has been fed from a 10 Amp fuse adjacent to the
battery. so Heavy wiring can be Isolated by the master switch
Personally I would only connect the starter solenoid directly to the battery
if both were firewall forward & adjacent I would then route other supplies
via a 30 amp fuse adjacent to the battery & via a master isolating switch.
I believe it is possible to get a remote mechanically operated battery
switch (Used on boats & racing cars I believe) as the battery contactor
must be continuously rated and consumes approx 1 amp
do not archive
Clive Richards G-CBDG
----- Original Message -----
From: "doug kandle" <d_kandle@velocitus.net>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 2:08 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Basic Battery Wiring
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "doug kandle" <d_kandle@velocitus.net>
>
>
> craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:
>> Run the starter directly from the battery through the starter's contactor
>> but power the coil in the contactor from the switched buss. So the
>> starter
>> is fed directly but the contactor can't close unless the master is on.
>>
>> -- Craig
>
> Craig:
> My battery is behind my seat, 6 feet or so aft of the firewall. I don't
> want any uncontrolled heavy wire to go from the battery area to the
> firewall (to limit the amount of cable that can cause me real problems if
> it shorts out). So, I want my master solenoid to be right next to the
> battery. If I connect my starter to the battery, without passing through
> the master solenoid, then I would have to run an uncontrolled heavy wire
> from the battery to the engine this would completely negate any advantage
> of having the solenoid next to the battery.
>
> In a forced landing you turn off the master so that there will be less
> chance of any sparks starting a fire. I want all of the electrical system
> possible to be inert if I ever have to do a forced landing.
>
> I just double checked the drawings for my Cessna 206 and it passes the
> starter current through both contactors. Since the part I am using is
> identical (I believe) to the one in my Cessna, it should be able to handle
> the current.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=71007#71007
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Basic Battery Wiring |
OK but if you do not run the starter wire through the main contactor next to
the battery, and you should (God forbid) have a serious accident, then you
are dealing with a high amperage wire run from the battery, through the
cockpit, into the engine room and you've got no way to disconnect it. If debris
or
some piece of wreckage happened to cut into the insulation on that wire you
might find yourself sitting on the equivalent of an arc welder that you can't
turn off . I don't even want to think about what would happen if we add a
broken fuel line to this problem. Seems to me that main contactor should shut
off ALL electrical power except maybe a one amp (or less) breaker protected
circuit to provide memory power to the avionics.
Carroll Jernigan
do not archive
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
Well, if the next wave of terrorists don't do any better than I did on this site
they'll never make it across the fence.
Was on the phone, taking notes with one hand, clicking through email with the other.....ooops;
reminded me of the first time I tried to fly a Bell 47. Needed
training wheels!
Regards to all.
Zed
do not archive
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "george may" <gfmjr_20@hotmail.com>
Todds was great towork with and delivery was prompt.
George May
601XL 912s
>From: "leinad" <leinad@hughes.net>
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: canopie sources
>Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 12:51:51 -0800
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "leinad" <leinad@hughes.net>
>
>Do any of you plans builders have an opinion on where to buy the canopy?
>I've identified 3 sources.
>Todds, Aircraft Extras, and Zenith.
>Dan Dempsey
>Central VA
>(Zodiac XL/ Corvair)
>
>--------
>Scratch building XL with Corvair Engine
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=70961#70961
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Find a local pizza place, music store, museum and morethen map the best
route! http://local.live.com?FORM=MGA001
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: | 'Copter Training |
Fun flying. I got to best of 684 before my finger tired out.
Do not archive.
----- Original Message -----
From: Lynn Dingfelder
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 1:15 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Zenith 'Copter Training
Future 'Copter Pilots,
Maybe Chris Heinze will get bored
in retirement and design a helicopter. We need to be ready.
This may not work on a phone connection.
Lynn Dingfelder
Corry, PA
601 XL do not archive
www.hurtwood.demon.co.uk/Fun/copter.swf
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: | picture of the day + question |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gary Boothe" <gboothe@calply.com>
Carlos,
Sorry for the late reply - just received last week's e-mails. Thanks for
sharing the idea of holding the position of the nose ribs. I managed to
overcome the problem, but it wasn't as pretty as your method. I may be able
to make good use on the center section, though.
By now you have surely received several responses to your question about
positioning the nose skin before the top and bottom skin. My initial thought
is that it would not work so well, for two reasons:
1) The nose skin has to overlap the rear skins anyhow, which would
make fitting and drilling the rear skins difficult;
2) Sometimes, a great amount of force needs to be applied to the
straps to get the nose skin to completely make the bend. Having the rear
skins already attached gives the ribs enough strength to hold up to that
force from the straps.
Of course, my experience is with HDS wings, which may be slightly more
difficult as the outboard nose ribs change in size (not sure how that
compares to HD wings).
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
...Question: the construction manual says you should (a) rivet all the ribs
to the spar; (b) rivet the rear spar to the ribs (b) drill and rivet the
rear (top and bottom) skins, and only then (e)drill and rivet the nose skin.
I'm thinking that doing the nose skin first of all would make the fitting of
the nose skin much
easier....
Does anybody see any "gotchas"?
Thanks in advance for your insight
Carlos Sa
CH601-HD, plans
Montreal, Canada
do not archive (until a good answer is found :o) )
__________________________________________________
En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Courriel vous offre la meilleure protection
possible contre les messages non nollicits
http://mail.yahoo.ca Yahoo! Courriel
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 |
|
It seems to me from flights in others' planes that the control forces
are not so well harmonized in the 601XL, with the elevator being
significantly "lighter" than the ailerons. (I will be building a TD,
and have not flown one, and it won't have the nosewheel centering
system, so I really can't say how the rudder will feel.) Anyway, I was
considering adding aileron spades to lighten the control feel, adjusting
the size of the spades to get something more harmonious. Note that a
properly designed spade would add both aerodynamic and mass balance.
I am hoping that some other builder has tried this. Anyone out there?
Andy Elliott
601XL/TD, Corvair wannabe!
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: | "Jabiru engines" from Avweb.com |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "R.P." <zodie@adelphia.net>
I thought this might be an interesting article to share:
http://www.avweb.com/news/motorhead/193575-1.html
Motor Head
Unless you've been around homebuilts, you've probably never heard of a
Jabiru. (Sure, you may be familiar with the varieties of stork whose name
comes from the Tupi-Guarani term meaning "swollen neck.") I mean the Jabiru
airplane -- a tidy design that's morphed into several varieties: two- and
four-seat, 51% experimental and, soon, a ready-to-fly light sport
aircraft -- but, actually more to the point, the Jabiru engine. Even if
you're a certified-only kinda pilot, you should know more about Jabiru
because one of its engines may well be under the cowling of that hot little
light-sport aircraft you just bought.
In yet another example of invention shooting out of Mother Necessity, Jabiru
started as an airplane company and quickly found that the engine choices in
the circa-60-hp class were limited to practically one. And then that
manufacturer stopped making the engine.
So Jabiru designer Rodney Stiff began work on replacement. If you think
about it, there are scores of engine configurations out there -- and that's
just for pistons, more even if you're of the mind to harness the
exquisiteness of Felix Wankel's (rotary) design -- and the man who pens his
own airplane has the luxury of making the space outboard of the firewall
anything he chooses. So he can build an engine of pretty much any
configuration: inline, V, opposed, W, X ... so many possibilities.
Not So Different? ...
And yet the clean-sheet Jabiru arrived into this world in 1992 as an
air-cooled, opposed-piston, flat engine with a single, central crankshaft
bolted directly to the propeller, a single central camshaft that operates
two valves per cylinder through pushrods and rocker arms, and many other
similarities to our supposedly outdated certified engines. In fact, you
could see the Jabiru as the new product of an existing engine company
leveraging its knowledge of traditional designs, only making the engine
smaller and lighter. Comes to that, the Jabiru's diminutive valve covers in
some ways remind me of Continental's technically superior yet ill-fated
Tiara series'. Well, how about that?
Jabiru's first effort was a 1.6-liter (call it 98 cubic inches) but after
the first 40 were delivered, the company turned its quest for more power
into a new iteration, now displacing 2.2 liters (134 cubic inches) from a
97.5-mm bore and a comparatively short 74-mm stroke, and producing 80
horsepower. This became the Jabiru 2200. Take it one step further -- as
Continental and Lycoming (and Franklin and Pratt & Whitney and Wright)
did -- and bolt six cylinders to the case and you have the 3300, capable of
120 hp maximum and 107 continuous. That 3.3-liter displacement is 201 cubic
inches, making this a great comparison with the Continental O-200. (More on
that further down.) You may also have seen Jabiru's 5100, an eight-cylinder
derivative making 180 hp. The company has put that engine on the back burner
as it concentrates on the smaller mills.
... Actually, Quite Different
Take the top off any Jabiru-powered airplane and prepare to be dazzled. The
Jabiru glistens in beautifully CNC-machined 5000-series aluminum. The
jauntily cut cylinder heads -- separate pieces from the steel-lined barrels,
presumably easing valve work in the field -- expose a pair of
automotive-style spark plugs, side by side. The induction and exhaust
systems are neatly tucked underneath. To ease cooling concerns, each Jabiru
comes with a semi-plenum cooling shroud so that the internal layout of the
cowling isn't quite so critical. (Being air cooled, though, a clean inlet
flow and appropriately valued exit area remain important.)
Once your gaze has wandered from the machined cylinders, they alight upon
the fully CNC-machined cases. The support structure is internal, so no bumps
and lumps, nor do you see the typically grotty casting quality evident on
your typical Lyconental. (Yes, I realize that the surface finish of a
casting has virtually no impact on its strength, but if I'm paying the
equivalent of a decent sports car on an engine alone, I'd at least like it
to be attractive.) If finish alone sold engines, the Jabiru would be flying
off the shelves.
Look further. Notice how the cylinders are staggered side to side? Seems a
lot more than usual, something you're at first willing to chalk up to an
optical illusion. But the exaggerated offset is real, the result of a
five-main-bearing design for the four-cylinder and a seven-main design for
the six. Each crank throw is supported on both sides by a main bearing; a
traditional aero engine has only a "flying web" between opposed cylinder
pairs. So a four-cylinder Lycoming, for example, has but three main
bearings, albeit very large ones, particularly the massive bearing between
the prop flange and the first set of cylinders. Jabiru's literature calls
out eight bearings on the six-cylinder engine, apparently counting the split
shells on the crank nose as two. These bearing shells are, like several
parts of the engine, automotive in origin. Jabiru uses a removable prop
flange so that replacement of the crank nose seal -- a fairly ugly job on a
traditional flat engine -- is quite easy. Nice touch. This feature, along
with the solid crankshaft, means a fixed-pitch prop or an electrically
adjustable one at best.
High-Speed Crankshaft, Low-Speed Pistons
Back to the crank design. In theory, more main bearings the better, but
there is a slight weight penalty and a supposed internal drag penalty as
well. However, this design makes sense in light of the Jabiru's high
operating speeds. For the 3300, maximum power comes at a lofty 3300 rpm,
while maximum-continuous is 2750 rpm. Thanks to the 74-mm stroke (2.91
inches), the piston speeds remain moderate. A Continental O-200 has a
3.88-inch stroke, for comparison. Maximum piston speed for the 3300 is 1602
feet per minute, compared to 1778 fpm for the Continental; at the Jabiru's
max-continuous speed (2750 rpm), it's a modest 1335 fpm. Your IO-520 is
whipping along at 1800 fpm at takeoff and 1533 fpm at a leisurely 2300 rpm
cruise setting. But let's have true perspective: A Yamaha YZF-R6 sportbike,
with a teeny-tiny 42.5-mm stroke (1.67 inches), wailing at its (theoretical)
17,500-rpm redline, posts a breathtaking 4880-fpm max. piston speed. You
don't want to be anywhere near that sucker when it blows.
That's a long way around to suggesting that the Jabiru's operating speeds
are, in many ways, conservative. The valvetrain is similarly conservative,
with a single, underslung camshaft, two valves in each cylinder and simple
screw-and-locknut adjustments in the heads. Jabiru recommends checking the
valve lash several times early in the engine's life, but the job appears to
be a simple one. Many of the valvetrain components come from Honda, while
the pistons are modified Australian-market GM pieces (the modification is to
add a piston pin circlip to keep the pin from riding out and scoring the
bore.) Those pistons provide a modest 8.0:1 compression ratio, which would
be suitable for auto fuel if only Jabiru were confident of the go-juice's
quality; because it isn't, the only recommended fuel is 100LL.
Rotax Comparison
In many respects, the Jabiru follows the conventions set by the Rotax 912,
arguably the most popular "nonstandard" aviation engine in the last decade
and a half. (Rotax says there are more than 15,000 of them in service.) A
simple, crank-mounted, electrical system powers the airplane and the
ignition from a permanent-magnet alternator, much like modern motorcycles
do. The timing is fixed at 25 degrees. Where the Rotax uses independent
coils, the Jabiru has two modified Honda coils feeding a pair of small
distributors for the dual-ignition system. Similarly, while the Rotax
employs motorcycle-style Bing carburetors, the Jabiru has one feeding an
under-engine plenum that shares space, Lycoming-like, with the oil pan.
(Still, carburetor heat is a recommended airframe addition.)
Thanks to its greater displacement -- the Jabiru six's 3.3 liters dwarfs the
912's 1201 cc (74 cubic inches) -- the Aussie engine pounds out more power
than even the turbocharged Rotax 914, and does so at much lower engine
speed. (Remember that the Rotax has a reduction gearbox.) Bigger and
simpler, too: No liquid cooling setup to deal with, one fewer carb (and no
need to synchronize), and a pilot-friendly wet-sump oiling system that
obviates the need for an external tank and the traditional "burping"
required of the 912 to read the oil level properly. That and the Jabiru uses
traditional aviation oil, so there'll be no need to stomp out to the Mobil
station down the road from the airport when you need a quart.
In many respects, the 3300 is the perfect "tweener" engine, bigger than the
stoutest Rotax (for now) and still smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the
lowest Lycoming or Continental. With the low-end LSAs becoming modern
darlings, Jabiru could be well placed.
Take It For A Spin
As everyone knows, there are specifications and company propaganda, and then
there's flying. I had the good fortune to spend a day with a Jabiru 3300 in
a Jabiru airframe recently. And while my Rotax 912 time -- probably 200
hours or more, but well spread out among a variety of airframes -- isn't
terribly recent, I think I can still offer a few useful observations.
Like most good engines, the Jabiru comes to life without fuss, thanks to a
decent ignition system and well-considered jetting in the single Bing.
Spinning a lightweight Sensenich composite prop -- carbon fiber over wood,
ground adjustable -- the engine feels responsive, and moves the J230
Experimental with ease. Runup is conventional but short: Check the ignition
and glance at the gauges. There's no prop control, no mixture.
(As on the Rotax 912, the Bing carburetor self-adjusts. It's a simple and
largely effective system. Inside the carburetor throat is a piston [called a
slide] that descends to block air flow. Its movement is controlled by a
large diaphragm above that responds to air density [volume] through the
carb. At high volume, like takeoff, the slide rises, allowing more air to
flow. That's great, but the trick is the needle attached to the slide. This
tapered needle descends into the main jet cavity. The higher the slide, the
further the needle comes out of the main jet tube and the more fuel flows.
At altitude and/or reduced throttle, the slide descends and the needle
blocks more of the main jet tube, reducing fuel flow. My experience with the
912 is that the system works as advertised but EGTs inevitably drop at
altitude, hurting fuel efficiency. In fact, Jabiru lists the 75% cruise
consumption of the 3300 as 6.87 gph, which calculates out to a specific fuel
consumption of 0.51 pounds per hour per horsepower. A carbureted Lycoming
can do better, manually leaned, at around 0.45-0.47 pph/hp; an injected
six-cylinder Continental, with balanced injectors, can do an impressive
0.385.)
Yes, But How Does It Sound?
Stand outside and witness a takeoff, and you hear a short burst of prop-tip
noise and a very quiet engine note somewhere between an IO-360 Continental
and a Porsche. Not exactly grumbly but not bumblebee, either.
>From inside, the 3300 moves the Jabiru smartly down the runway and results
in very good climb considering the power loading. In this airplane, the
temps seemed very well controlled, with CHTs staying below the magic 380
degrees -- though I don't know if that number is magic for the Jabiru or
not.
Cruising is as simple as setting the rpm for the desired power and watching
the temps. While I don't doubt that a controllable carb (or fuel injection)
would improve the 3300's fuel specifics, somehow the drop from 7 gph to,
say, 6 seems hardly worth the effort. During the approach and landing, the
engine is extremely well behaved, and the ability to basically ignore it and
fly the airplane is wonderful. I did manage to botch the first landing --
trying out my Beech A-36 flare on a knee-height airplane -- and noticed the
only quirk of the day. The engine is very responsive, which is no surprise
with a lot of cubes and a single, smallish carburetor, and asking for just a
bit of power can result in actually getting a lot. Whoa, boy.
The final comparison comes with the Continental O-200. The Continental is
two inches longer than the six-cylinder Jabiru, nearly five inches taller,
and almost nine inches wider. Continental lists the O-200's dry weight as
170 pounds, which probably doesn't include the charging or ignition systems.
The Jabiru, including an exhaust system, all electrics, and the carburetor,
is said to weigh 178. (A basic 912 is some 50 pounds lighter.)
In all, the more I look at the Jabiru, the more impressed I become. Now to
scam another ride in that Jabiru airplane, under the guise of continued
research of course ...
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: | Re: Basic Battery Wiring |
Carroll,
Almost every aircraft with a battery is wired with a master contactor
somewhere near it... If you are worried about some freak thing happening then
run the wires thru a PVC pipe or something. Bottom line is that if you don't
put the master contactor by the battery you are creating a bigger hazard than
you are trying to avoid.
do not archive
Jeff
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: | Re: Zenith-List Digest: First Flight |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John M. Goodings" <goodings@yorku.ca>
A good deal has been said in the List about the first flight, most of it
pretty helpful. Permit me to add our view. ("Our" refers to me and my
son - we built our CH601HD with R912S together.) Firstly, I would
DEFINITELY use a test pilot if any reasonably suitable person is
available. Most of my time was in Cessnas, my son's time in Katanas; the
flight characteristics of the 601HD are VERY different. (It has been said
in this List that the 601HD or HDS has the glide ratio of a grand piano;
it takes some getting used to, in setting up the final approach and
landing.) We were lucky enough to have a 25,000-hour airliner captain
available. That, of itself, means little; he would say the same thing.
But he had built his own 601HD, and had 70 hours on it. It is my
understanding in Canada that a second person can serve as flight crew if
he/she is a licensed pilot. We were interested in being safe. Being safe
meant having the test pilot in the left seat, and myself or my son in the
right seat. The test pilot flew the aircraft; the other person had a pad
on his knee and was watching the gauges like a hawk. Perhaps the thing
most likely to go wrong on the first flight is that the engine overheats.
The second person will perceive this very quickly, and tell the test
pilot. If the first flight was compounded by some unusual flight
characteristics, the test pilot all alone would be VERY busy! - even a
great test pilot like ours. In fact, my son went in the right seat for
the first half-hour, and myself for the second half hour; one defers to
one's children! We both got a big kick out of it. And yes, the engine
had a tendency to overheat; the air outflow from the bottom of the cowl
was too restricted, a matter that was easy to correct. If I were doing it
again, I would definitely follow the same procedure. Incidentally, our
test pilot went in the right seat of his own 601HD on its first flight,
with an experienced 601 driver in the left seat.
John and Peter Goodings, C-FGPJ, CH601HD with R912S,
Toronto/Waterloo/Ottawa.
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: Basic Battery Wiring |
Jeff
Sorry I guess I didn't make my self clear. (My wife says that I never do)
What I was trying to say was that we should not bypass the master contactor
with a starter circuit main power feed going directly to the engine compartment.
The master contactor should be just that, the Master. When that contactor is
open there should be no current available to any electrical circuit anywhere
in the aircraft. The possible exception to this is a circuit to the "always
hot buss" to power the clock and other avionics memories. Even here I would
use the lowest circuit breaker rating I could get away with, and mount it
as close to the battery as possible.
Back in the sixties when I was learning to fly, my instructors always
stressed that during a forced landing you should always turn the mags, fuel and
master switch off (before touchdown if possible) to reduce the chance of a post
cash fire. If you have bypassed the master contactor with a starter cable (or
anything else) you can't turn if off.
I really think we are both saying the same thing.
Carroll Jernigan
do not archive
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: | First flight - crew??? |
Juan and others,
You might want to check with the FAA and EAA, the latter probably
knowing more, about crew members on first flights of homebuilt a/c.
Going to a knowledgeable source will protect you from internet experts.
This is from EAA's e-hotline of February 7, 2003, I would suspect if you
contact Joe Norris at the EAA you would find the same info:
Q & A: Question of the Week
Question for EAA Aviation Information Services:
The question in e-HOT LINE, Vol. 3, No. 5, states: The OpLims will
contain the following or a similarly worded statement: During the
flight-testing phase, no person may be carried in this aircraft during
flight unless that person is essential to the purpose of the flight.
Okay, that's the letter of the law. Now please outline what could be
considered essential to the flight. I recently flew with a builder/pilot
who has about five hours on his airplane. He has an electrical problem
which only occurs in flight, and it could affect operational safety of
the aircraft. I rode along to monitor instruments and take notes should
the problem occur. It did, and my readings and notes helped us solve the
problem. We considered it necessary to have someone along to monitor the
instrumentation so the pilot/builder could focus on flying the airplane
during the incident. Were we legal? If not, what is legal?
Answer:
If a pilot feels it necessary to have another individual in the aircraft
on a flight during the phase-one flight test period, this must be
approved by the area FAA office, and such approval must be shown in the
aircraft's operating limitations. In other words, this is not something
that can be decided "on the spot" before a flight, but must be approved
in advance by the FAA.
If there is a situation where the builder or flight-test pilot has a
specific need for additional crew in the aircraft during the fight test
period, FAA Advisory Circular AC 20-27E, Certification and Operation of
Amateur-Built Aircraft, offers the following advice:
"If an additional crew member is required for a particular test
function, that requirement should be specified in the application
program letter for the airworthiness certificate and listed in the
operating limitations by the FAA."
The FAA will review each application on a case-by-case basis, and may
allow additional crew if they feel there is sufficient justification.
How can we help you?
To ask a question regarding government issues, e-mail
govt@eaa.org<mailto:govt@eaa.org>. If you have a question about
registration, airmen, aircraft and medical certification, safety
records, performance, or any other matter, e-mail
infoserv@eaa.org<mailto:infoserv@eaa.org>.
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Zenairs & Snow, |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Samm Munn" <heliav8r@swbell.net>
Sorry, but since I live in San Antonio, Texas I have only a conceptual
notion as to this "snow" to which you refer.
----- Original Message -----
From: "TYA2" <tya2@4-fly.net>
Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 7:48 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
Samm Munn
Zenith 601XL, Corvair
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601HD accident |
MessageWhat most people don't realize is that, in the case of an
aircraft accident (but not an aircraft incident), control of the
aircraft is immediately assumed by the Federal Government, in the
persona of the National Transportation Safety Board. The FAA is acting
for the NTSB in this case.
After a portion of the investigation is complete, the FAA (NTSB) may
release the aircraft or portions thereof, generally, to the insurance
company or other "owner" of the aircraft. Some parts, pieces, etc. may
be retained by the NTSB as evidence or for further evaluation.
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Stout
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2006 5:39 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 601HD accident
Don said the FAA was coming to pick up his plane next week. It appears
they are going to seize the plane. While I would be wiling to
participate in an accident investigation, I'd be hot over them taking
the plane away. I guess it really doesn't matter since the insurance
totaled it. I know insurance will take it if it has been totaled. That's
generally the agreement for them paying you for the value of the plane,
but I didn't know the FAA could just seize it.
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: Basic Battery Wiring |
ACS page #407 right above the starter relay #22735 is a master relay
#111-226. The #22735 is for "intermittent duty" (like cranking the
engine) and the 111-226 is for "continuous duty" for allowing ANY
current to flow from the battery. Maybe I should have left the word
"master" off the "contactor" reference. As I said the information in a
ACS catalog is... priceless.
When using a catalog it would be helpful to know that looking up:
contactor, relay or solenoid should take you to the page that has what
your looking for. Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Afterfxllc@aol.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 12:06 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Basic Battery Wiring
jhstarn@verizon.net writes:
Master contactor = continuous
Starter Relay = intermittent
Starter Solenoid = intermittent
Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck .... still
might not be a duck
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: | "Jabiru engines" from Avweb.com |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
Given its recent date (Oct, 2006) the article seems oddly out of date. It
doesn't seem to know about the hydraulic lifters or the economy-tuning fuel
consumption numbers.
-- Craig
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: First flight - crew??? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
My respnse was from an FAA guy, do you recommend someone there?
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeff Small <zodiacjeff@msn.com>
>Sent: Oct 30, 2006 12:38 PM
>To: zenith-list <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Zenith-List: First flight - crew???
>
>Juan and others,
>
>You might want to check with the FAA and EAA, the latter probably knowing more,
about crew members on first flights of homebuilt a/c.
>
>Going to a knowledgeable source will protect you from internet experts.
>
>This is from EAA's e-hotline of February 7, 2003, I would suspect if you contact
Joe Norris at the EAA you would find the same info:
>
>
>Q & A: Question of the Week
>Question for EAA Aviation Information Services:
>The question in e-HOT LINE, Vol. 3, No. 5, states: The OpLims will contain the
following or a similarly worded statement: During the flight-testing phase, no
person may be carried in this aircraft during flight unless that person is essential
to the purpose of the flight.
>
>Okay, that's the letter of the law. Now please outline what could be considered
essential to the flight. I recently flew with a builder/pilot who has about
five hours on his airplane. He has an electrical problem which only occurs in
flight, and it could affect operational safety of the aircraft. I rode along to
monitor instruments and take notes should the problem occur. It did, and my
readings and notes helped us solve the problem. We considered it necessary to
have someone along to monitor the instrumentation so the pilot/builder could focus
on flying the airplane during the incident. Were we legal? If not, what is
legal?
>
>Answer:
>If a pilot feels it necessary to have another individual in the aircraft on a
flight during the phase-one flight test period, this must be approved by the area
FAA office, and such approval must be shown in the aircraft's operating limitations.
In other words, this is not something that can be decided "on the spot"
before a flight, but must be approved in advance by the FAA.
>
>If there is a situation where the builder or flight-test pilot has a specific
need for additional crew in the aircraft during the fight test period, FAA Advisory
Circular AC 20-27E, Certification and Operation of Amateur-Built Aircraft,
offers the following advice:
>
>"If an additional crew member is required for a particular test function, that
requirement should be specified in the application program letter for the airworthiness
certificate and listed in the operating limitations by the FAA."
>
>The FAA will review each application on a case-by-case basis, and may allow additional
crew if they feel there is sufficient justification.
>
>How can we help you?
>To ask a question regarding government issues, e-mail govt@eaa.org<mailto:govt@eaa.org>. If you have a question about registration, airmen, aircraft and medical certification, safety records, performance, or any other matter, e-mail infoserv@eaa.org<mailto:infoserv@eaa.org>.
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: | Basic Battery Wiring |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
The battery relay is a good idea if you want to have a master switch to
isolate the Battery encase of a problem. You can add a generator switch (
lower amperage ) to stop power form the generator in case of a short some
where in the panel.
I recommend if possible build a buss bar and have your circuit breakers
attached directly to the buss bar. That way any short circuit will almost
have to be down stream of the circuit breaker. I usually wire master
switches to activate the solenoid when the switch is closed to ground. That
removes the necessity of a hot wire going from the battery to the master
switch and returning to the solenoid. With that type of set up there are
more places for a short circuit to occur.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> doug kandle
> Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 2:03 PM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: Basic Battery Wiring
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "doug kandle"
> <d_kandle@velocitus.net>
>
> I have attached a picture of what I plan to do to wire my
> battery power in my 701. This is kind of the way that my
> Cessna is wired. Is this similar to what others are doing?
>
> Specifically- is the battery relay required? It seems like a
> good idea.
> My battery is behind the seat (where ZAC recommends) and I
> plan to put the solenoid there too.
>
> I only have the built in alternator in the Rotax, so no
> additional alternator (30A max).
>
> This plane will only be used for day, VFR, ground always in
> sight flying. So I'm not too worried if all of my electrical
> fails. I'm not going to worry about two-point failures
> (electrical and coolant for example).
>
> Do any of you see any problems with this setup?
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=70921#70921
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/701powerwiring_739.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Zenairs & Snow, |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
On this note of the plane on balance- The plans for the 601 xl show the flat part
of the main gear facing forward, yet other planes are facing back. I called
the shop and they put the flat part forward based on the Jabiru being heavier
and the plane would fly off on take off versus having to unstick it. Any thoughts,
mine is in place flat side forward. but if push comes to shove I can
turn the mains araound.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: TYA2 <tya2@4-fly.net>
>Sent: Oct 29, 2006 8:48 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: TYA2 <tya2@4-fly.net>
>
>I was whining earlier about the recent snowfall. Made the 10 mile trip to
>the airport and all the tricycle gear aircraft but one were sitting on
>their asses. We had about 6 inches of partly cloudy and a 1/2 inch of
>ice. The CH2000 has a very small stabilator so I figured it would not be
>on its butt. WRONG. I cleaned all the snow from it and only when I
>started to get to ice did the plane rebalance to the nose wheel. I had
>already cleaned the top of the fuselage off. Obviously I am going to have
>to make regular airport visits to keep the nose on the
>ground. Unfortunately when you pull the controls full back on the CH2000
>/Alarus it is almost horizontal so it really collects snow. I need to
>call Zenair tomorrow about the winter fronts they promised me. Cold oil
>temperatures are a regular problem with this airplane. The factory spells
>out 20-50 W oil for the Lycoming 0-235. 65 W seems more appropriate for
>northern climates. or 15W50 Aeroshell. Observations or comments on cold
>weather flying in CH2000s are welcome. My bird came from New Hampshire
>but from a divorce settlement via 3rd party so I have no real folks to ask
>direct ??? to,
>
>I had the cabin heat on Friday afternoon but didn't notice any great source
>of warmth in the 35F weather.
>
>Reg
>
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: canopie sources |
I bought mine from Todds, they were easy to work with, and offered the
"modified" (slightly more headroom, somewhat longer) canopy. Price th
en for a 1/8th inch, tinted canopy was $300. plus shipping ($149 to Ka
nsas City). I was very pleased with the product.=0A=0APaul Rodri
guez 601XL/Corvair=0AStill working on the canopy=0A ----- Origi
nal Message ----- =0A From: george may<mailto:gfmjr_20@HOTMAIL.COM
> =0A To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.c
om> =0A Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 6:39 AM=0A Subject: RE:
Zenith-List: canopie sources=0A=0A=0A --> Zenith-List messa
ge posted by: "george may" <gfmjr_20@hotmail.com<mailto:gfmjr_20@hotma
il.com>>=0A=0A=0A Todds was great towork with and delivery w
as prompt.=0A=0A George May=0A 601XL 912s=0A=0A >Fro
m: "leinad" <leinad@hughes.net<mailto:leinad@hughes.net>>=0A >Repl
y-To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
=0A >To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
=0A >Subject: Zenith-List: canopie sources=0A >Date: Sun, 29 O
ct 2006 12:51:51 -0800=0A >=0A >--> Zenith-List message posted
by: "leinad" <leinad@hughes.net<mailto:leinad@hughes.net>>=0A >
=0A >Do any of you plans builders have an opinion on where to buy
the canopy?=0A >I've identified 3 sources.=0A >Todds, Aircraft
Extras, and Zenith.=0A >Dan Dempsey=0A >Central VA=0A >(Z
odiac XL/ Corvair)=0A >=0A >--------=0A >Scratch building
XL with Corvair Engine=0A >=0A >=0A >=0A >=0A >Rea
d this topic online here:=0A >=0A >http://forums.matronics.com
/viewtopic.php?p=70961#70961=0A >=0A >=0A >=0A >
=0A >=0A >=0A >=0A >=0A >=0A >=0A=0A _____
____________________________________________________________=0A Fi
nd a local pizza place, music store, museum and more.then map the best
=0A route! http://local.live.com?FORM=MGA001<http://local.live
=======================
=======================
tronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Z
=======================
======================0A
=======================
=======================
=======================
=======================
onics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>=0A _
-=======================
=======================
===============0A=0A=0A=0A
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: Basic Battery Wiring |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Move your starter solenoid back beside the battery. That way the only time
the heavy cable is energized is when the starter is engaged.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> doug kandle
> Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 10:38 PM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Basic Battery Wiring
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "doug kandle"
> <d_kandle@velocitus.net>
>
>
> craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:
> > Run the starter directly from the battery through the
> starter's contactor
> > but power the coil in the contactor from the switched buss.
> So the starter
> > is fed directly but the contactor can't close unless the
> master is on.
> >
> > -- Craig
>
> Craig:
> My battery is behind my seat, 6 feet or so aft of the
> firewall. I don't want any uncontrolled heavy wire to go
> from the battery area to the firewall (to limit the amount of
> cable that can cause me real problems if it shorts out). So,
> I want my master solenoid to be right next to the battery.
> If I connect my starter to the battery, without passing
> through the master solenoid, then I would have to run an
> uncontrolled heavy wire from the battery to the engine this
> would completely negate any advantage of having the solenoid
> next to the battery.
>
> In a forced landing you turn off the master so that there
> will be less chance of any sparks starting a fire. I want
> all of the electrical system possible to be inert if I ever
> have to do a forced landing.
>
> I just double checked the drawings for my Cessna 206 and it
> passes the starter current through both contactors. Since
> the part I am using is identical (I believe) to the one in my
> Cessna, it should be able to handle the current.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=71007#71007
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Basic Battery Wiring |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
A Rose by any other name is not altogether accurate... Come to think of it
NOT!
A Master contactor is designed to operate energized in the closed position
for hours and hours without over heating.
An energized starter solenoid will begin to overheat within five minutes and
becomes dangerous.
To add protection to these lines I recommend placing both solenoids as close
to the battery as feasible. The master solenoid I usually wire so the
master switch completes a ground. The starter solenoid as has been
discussed here will usually energize from the master buss. The line from
the starter switch to the solenoid being dead in flight and energized only
to start the engine.
If you are looking for non certified Master solenoids try looking at
trailer or RV parts shops. The master contactor type solenoid is used to
isolate batteries ( hence a battery isolation solenoid )when the engine is
off in an RV and will energize the line to charge the second battery when
the engine is running.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> JOHN STARN
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 1:14 AM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Basic Battery Wiring
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "JOHN STARN" <jhstarn@verizon.net>
>
> Master contactor---Starter Relay---Starter Solenoid--- "A
> Rose by any other
> name...".
> Aircraft Spruce, page #407, P/N 22735, $9.65. Even if you buy
> it elseware
> get a FREE ACS catalog. It has a LOT more than pieces & prices... in
> building the info it contains is....priceless. KABONG Do Not Archive
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 7:09 PM
> Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Basic Battery Wiring
>
>
> > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
> <craig@craigandjean.com>
> >
> > Sounds like a sound line of reasoning. I checked a few of
> the AeroElectric
> > schematics and they run the starter through the master
> contactor. It just
> > isn't my first choice. Where did you buy the master contactor?
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Basic Battery Wiring |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
B&C is a good source of master and starter contactors (along with many other
electrical parts cited in the AeroElectric Connection):
http://www.bandc.biz/
-- Craig
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: Basic Battery Wiring |
PVC not only burns like flint but also produces toxic fumes!
Having both the master solenoid and the starter solenoid next to the
battery
means you can isolate all power coming from the battery in case of a
short.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Afterfxllc@aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Basic Battery Wiring
Carroll,
Almost every aircraft with a battery is wired with a master
contactor
somewhere near it... If you are worried about some freak thing happening
then run the wires thru a PVC pipe or something. Bottom line is that if
you
don't put the master contactor by the battery you are creating a bigger
hazard than you are trying to avoid.
do not archive
Jeff
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: | More basic battery explosion |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
You'll need to stuff two or three green Scotch Brite pads in between the battery
and nearby solenoid to soak up the escaping hydrogen gas so as to prevent an
explosion caused by non-Factory Mutual, non-approved-for-hazardous-locations,
solenoids (regardless of duty cycle).
This might be a bit more severe than no fuel or low coolant.
Regards,
Zed
do not archive
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Texas eh? Conceptual is all you want...Believe me!
Noel
Nfld. No snow yet thank you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Samm Munn
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 2:15 PM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Samm Munn" <heliav8r@swbell.net>
>
> Sorry, but since I live in San Antonio, Texas I have only a
> conceptual
> notion as to this "snow" to which you refer.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "TYA2" <tya2@4-fly.net>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 7:48 PM
> Subject: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
>
> Samm Munn
> Zenith 601XL, Corvair
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: 601HD accident |
DO NOT ARCHIVE,
Like everything else that some get ticked off at, you get what you elect.
ie: The tremendous involvement of the TSA with people's personal lives, etc
- especially by people who do not know what they are doing. Some of what we
as a society get is just what the German society got during the 1930's -
leading to a downfall of the society at the benefit of the few. Our (US)
government has far to much control and say in individual lives.
--
Semper Fi,
Steven R. Hulland
CH 600 Taildragger
Amado, AZ
This and all other incoming/outgoing email, attachments and replies scanned
prior to opening/sending and uses an external firewall to help insure virus
free email and attachments.
Message 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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>> Jabiru being heavier
The Jabiru is heavier than what? About the only lighter engine that I know
of installed on XLs is the Rotax 912. Aren't the rest heavier?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Juan Vega
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
On this note of the plane on balance- The plans for the 601 xl show the
flat part of the main gear facing forward, yet other planes are facing back.
I called the shop and they put the flat part forward based on the Jabiru
being heavier and the plane would fly off on take off versus having to
unstick it. Any thoughts, mine is in place flat side forward. but if push
comes to shove I can turn the mains araound.
Juan
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Zodie Rocket" <zodierocket@hsfx.ca>
The decision is ultimately yours, the old plans had the taper at the
front and the new plans have it reversed. The new way allows the wings
to provide rotation at an earlier stage and the balance is better on the
mains which stops any tendency of dropping the nose on landings. The
down side is with one person sitting in a seat it is possible for a
second person to tail the plane into the apron ( and boy you should see
the look on a persons face when the tail makes a huge thump and this is
with a Cont 0-200 installed). Now in the old way with the landing gear
having the taper in front then you could have two people stand on the
steps and not tail out the plane. So for easier landings and take offs
go the new way. I tend to recommend the old way and just hold the nose
off on landings. But once again the choice is ultimately yours.
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 Juan Vega
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
On this note of the plane on balance- The plans for the 601 xl show the
flat part of the main gear facing forward, yet other planes are facing
back. I called the shop and they put the flat part forward based on the
Jabiru being heavier and the plane would fly off on take off versus
having to unstick it. Any thoughts, mine is in place flat side forward.
but if push comes to shove I can turn the mains araound.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: TYA2 <tya2@4-fly.net>
>Sent: Oct 29, 2006 8:48 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: TYA2 <tya2@4-fly.net>
>
>I was whining earlier about the recent snowfall. Made the 10 mile
trip to
>the airport and all the tricycle gear aircraft but one were sitting on
>their asses. We had about 6 inches of partly cloudy and a 1/2 inch
of
>ice. The CH2000 has a very small stabilator so I figured it would not
be
>on its butt. WRONG. I cleaned all the snow from it and only when I
>started to get to ice did the plane rebalance to the nose wheel. I
had
>already cleaned the top of the fuselage off. Obviously I am going to
have
>to make regular airport visits to keep the nose on the
>ground. Unfortunately when you pull the controls full back on the
CH2000
>/Alarus it is almost horizontal so it really collects snow. I need to
>call Zenair tomorrow about the winter fronts they promised me. Cold
oil
>temperatures are a regular problem with this airplane. The factory
spells
>out 20-50 W oil for the Lycoming 0-235. 65 W seems more appropriate
for
>northern climates. or 15W50 Aeroshell. Observations or comments on
cold
>weather flying in CH2000s are welcome. My bird came from New
Hampshire
>but from a divorce settlement via 3rd party so I have no real folks to
ask
>direct ??? to,
>
>I had the cabin heat on Friday afternoon but didn't notice any great
source
>of warmth in the 35F weather.
>
>Reg
>
>
--
10/30/2006
--
10/30/2006
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
thats right, rotx lightest, jabiru being heavier.
the question isn't weight of a specific engine. the question is when do you place
the mains flat side forward and do you go by plans or by book? and does it
impact take off and landing and is there a prefference?
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Craig Payne <craig@craigandjean.com>
>Sent: Oct 30, 2006 7:13 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>>> Jabiru being heavier
>
>The Jabiru is heavier than what? About the only lighter engine that I know
>of installed on XLs is the Rotax 912. Aren't the rest heavier?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Juan Vega
>Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 2:22 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
>
>On this note of the plane on balance- The plans for the 601 xl show the
>flat part of the main gear facing forward, yet other planes are facing back.
>I called the shop and they put the flat part forward based on the Jabiru
>being heavier and the plane would fly off on take off versus having to
>unstick it. Any thoughts, mine is in place flat side forward. but if push
>comes to shove I can turn the mains araound.
>
>
>Juan
>
>
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: 701 headset jacks location? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "RayStL" <ray.stlaurent@vsea.com>
Larry, I like the location behind head, in the middle. Although I did not want
to put something that blocked the opening to the luggage area your approach gave
me the idea of mounting the jacks vertically on the luggage floor near the
front lip. That way I can get unobstructed access to the compartment (before I
plug in) and still get the more tangle free location. Thanks.
--------
Ray St-Laurent
701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=71244#71244
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
your explanation is puts it clearly, thanx I am going with Taper to the back.
Will give an update when I fly.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Zodie Rocket <zodierocket@hsfx.ca>
>Sent: Oct 30, 2006 7:42 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Zodie Rocket" <zodierocket@hsfx.ca>
>
>The decision is ultimately yours, the old plans had the taper at the
>front and the new plans have it reversed. The new way allows the wings
>to provide rotation at an earlier stage and the balance is better on the
>mains which stops any tendency of dropping the nose on landings. The
>down side is with one person sitting in a seat it is possible for a
>second person to tail the plane into the apron ( and boy you should see
>the look on a persons face when the tail makes a huge thump and this is
>with a Cont 0-200 installed). Now in the old way with the landing gear
>having the taper in front then you could have two people stand on the
>steps and not tail out the plane. So for easier landings and take offs
>go the new way. I tend to recommend the old way and just hold the nose
>off on landings. But once again the choice is ultimately yours.
>
>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 Juan Vega
>Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 4:22 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Zenairs & Snow,
>
>
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: canopie sources |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "leinad" <leinad@hughes.net>
Thanks all for the replies.
Scott, do you have a timeline on when you might be airborn?
Do not archive
Dan Dempsey (XL/Corvair)
--------
Scratch building XL with Corvair Engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=71263#71263
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! --
|