Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:56 AM - Re: aircraft inspection (passpat@aol.com)
2. 05:09 AM - STOL 701 Wheel measurements (John Bolding)
3. 06:00 AM - CH601XL: Center of Gravity (Martin Pohl)
4. 06:32 AM - Re: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS (LarryMcFarland)
5. 07:01 AM - Re: aircraft inspection (Zodie Rocket)
6. 07:17 AM - Re: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL? (Dr. Andrew Elliott)
7. 07:23 AM - Re: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL? (David X)
8. 07:28 AM - Re: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS (David Mikesell)
9. 08:29 AM - Re: Wing locker (David X)
10. 08:38 AM - Re: Re: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL? (Zodie Rocket)
11. 08:48 AM - Re: STOL 701 Wheel measurements (Jon Croke)
12. 09:03 AM - Re: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL? (Martin Pohl)
13. 09:15 AM - 601XL Strut clearance (Herbert Heaton)
14. 09:26 AM - Polishing (Bill Naumuk)
15. 12:38 PM - Re: 601XL Strut clearance (LarryMcFarland)
16. 03:14 PM - Re: 601XL Strut clearance (Juan Vega)
17. 03:56 PM - Re: Rotax 912 Fuel Pump Inlet/Outlet (Tommy Walker)
18. 05:03 PM - Re: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS (Dave Austin)
19. 05:39 PM - Daily Picture (Zodie Rocket)
20. 05:51 PM - Fw: Vortex Generators - Test flight 1 (Dave Austin)
21. 06:50 PM - Re: Daily Picture (N5SL)
22. 06:54 PM - Re: Vortex Generators - Test flight 1 (Chris Lewis)
23. 09:22 PM - Re: Wing locker (Gary Gower)
24. 09:25 PM - Re: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS (Dave Austin)
25. 10:08 PM - Any News on the CH-750? (KThorp)
26. 11:12 PM - Sportpilots and eligable aircraft (84KF)
27. 11:18 PM - Re: Polishing (Bryan Martin)
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: aircraft inspection |
Hi Guys & Gals :
Just my opinion it would be to a builders advantage to have per-inspection input
from your local EAA AB-DAR or Tech- councillor. I don't think it is required
as previous stated, another independent review is sometimes very useful after
all the whole ideal is to build a safe project.
Ernest L Patterson
AB-DAR EAA
TECH councillor
-----Original Message-----
From: p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net
Sent: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: aircraft inspection
Hi Ben,
I don't think pre-cover inspections are needed in the USA any more. I am sure
there is no such requirement for all metal aircraft like the 701.
Paul
XL fuselage
At 06:47 PM 11/11/2006, you wrote:
Hello,
I have a 701 tail kit on the way and I'm looking forward to building this fine
aircraft. I was curious about the inspection process of a all metal aircraft.
With tube and fabric it is pretty easy to perform a pre-cover inspection, how
is this accomplished with metal? Does each component have to be inspected
before closing or does photo documentation suffice?
Thanks,
Ben
-
________________________________________________________________________
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: | STOL 701 Wheel measurements |
Guys,
I'm considering a couple of scratch built options for the 701 main
gear.
I need a couple of items to pass on to the engineer that is doing the
analysis and hopefully someone can help.
The Matco Wheel used for the Tundra Tire option is MHMH6BD.75XT, I
need the weight of the wheel,tire, axel and brake assy. Also need the
width of the wheel between the rims. Outside dia of inflated tire would
be useful useful as well. OR if someone has a pair that they need to
unload I'll buy them.
This is a preliminary design exercise to see if a homebuilt carbon
gear can be made using pultruded rods into a simple mold. Goals are
weight reduction (several POUNDS is anticipated)and reduced cost over
the purchased original alum gear. THANKS I'll post the results of the
study to the group. LOW&SLOW John Bolding
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: | CH601XL: Center of Gravity |
Hi folks
How comes that the XL can have an approved C.G. range of 300 - 450 mm in the U.S.
(MTOW = 600 kg) and a much better range of 300 - 520 mm in the U.K. (MTOW =
560 kg)?
Link to PFA (UK) Zodiac XL type certificate: http://www.pfa.org.uk/Data%20Sheets/162B%20ZENAIR%20CH601-XL.pdf
The C.G. range is in my opinion a matter of aerodynamics solely and not of the
MTOW-limit. The MTOW mainly depends on structural strength (mainly wing bending
which is the limiting factor for the XL maximum loading). Or am I not right?
Is there anybody who can explain? Is it perhaps because of the elongated elevator-trim-tab
(over the whole left elevator width)?
Cheers from Switzerland
Martin
XL-builder, QBK Czech Aircraft Works
--------
Martin Pohl
Zodiac XL QBK
8645 Jona, Switzerland
www.pohltec.ch/ZodiacXL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=73863#73863
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: | Re: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS |
Hi Dick,
In the March/April issue of Zenith Newsletter #153, there was an article
on Vortex Generators that were added to an HDS. A few dimensions and
drawings showing how they can be made. I remember because the area of
the leading edge fuel tanks didn't have any. The claim was that the VGs
would reduce stall by 5 mph and to comply with performance of LS
aircraft might have been true even if the regulations as they stand
would not recognize such an adaption to that purpose. With a 912
engine, the 601HDS would fly in ground effect at 35 KTs, and fly at less
than 40 KTs at full gross. Said he could not get it to stall with these
installed. The aircraft is supposed to qualify for Sport Pilot with
these. If you're interested in the article, I can scan it and send it.
Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
DICK WILBERS wrote:
>
> Dear List:
>
> Has anyone installed Vortex Generators on the 601 HDS? I have met a
> guy from Niagara Aircraft, a Canadian Co., who says he can furnish
> VG's for the 601 HDS. This may be interesting if he is correct.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard in Florida
>
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: | aircraft inspection |
I was curious about the inspection process of a all metal aircraft.
Does each component have to be inspected before closing or does photo
documentation suffice?
Ben
Hi Ben, in case you=92re a Canadian then I will add to the replies you
already have. The Canadian Regs state that you must have a pre-cover
inspection administered by the MD-RA, this is for the homebuilt
category ( there are no inspections for Ultralight or AULA). In the case
of the 701 you can build the whole plane and call for one pre-cover
inspection but to do this you will need to install temporary rivets in
one seam of all you parts, this is to allow the inspector to lift up a
portion of skin and look inside at the structure. Temp rivets are used
due to cost compared to cleco=92s also over time with moving parts
around
that have cleco=92s installed they tend to get damaged, by installing
temp
rivets you will not bang a cleco and damage the skin. The temp rivets
will be drilled out the day of your inspection, most inspectors will be
happy to help you out in this. Attached is a general list of what the
inspection will consist of , for builders without a pre-cover inspection
, I would suggest you take a few minutes perform your own with the
attached list in hand.
I=92m sorry for the file size , I couldn=92t reduce the .pdf to a
smaller
size, and I feel that this is information that deserves to be in the
archive.
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
--
11/10/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
11/11/2006
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: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL? |
The allowable CG *envelope* is not normally a simple rectangular box,
that is you don't get the same weight limits throughout the entire CG
range. Instead, it usually is a trapezoid, is skewed in one direction
(typically aft at the top) and may have some corners cut off. That
means that the allowable CG range usually both get smaller and shifts
aft as the weight increases. The reasons for this are not so hard to
see.
At forward CG's, you need to have enough elevator and trim authority to
fly the plane through the flare without the nosewheel hitting first.
The heavier the plane is at the same CG location, the more elevator
force you will need. Since the elevator is fixed size, this gives a
relation between the reciprocal relation between the CG location and
weight - more weight implies CG forward limit shifts aft.
Aft CG's tend to make the plane more and more sensitive in pitch. Far
enough aft and the plane would actually be unstable. This instability
is countered by the horizontal stabilizer. Again, since the stab is a
fixed size, there has to be a balance to get an airplane that is
flyable. In this case it depends again directly on the CG location and
weight (mass balance), and indirectly on the incidence angles of the
flying surfaces (aerodynamic balance). But basically, it means that
more weight implies that the CG range must shrink.
The relationship between gear capability and gross weight seems pretty
clear, but isn't. That is rarely what puts the top limit on the CG
envelope, but much more often that is determined by the structural
design limits of the rest of the plane (wings, especially) for that
particular certification category (standard, utility, aerobatic) and the
gear is added later to ensure that it can properly support that design
weight. In fact, many planes are certified for different CG envelopes
for different categories. There may also be different limits for
takeoff and landing. (The Bonanza was famous for being able to fly out
of the CG rear limit as you burned off fuel. Depends on where your fuel
tanks are.)
For taildraggers, the design process is a bit more involved, since there
are multiple landing types and can depend heavily on main wheel
placement.
Hope this made it a bit more clear. Of course, this is a
simplification, since there are other aerodynamic and structural factors
that have to be considered, but you probably get the idea. All basic
aircraft design texts have a chapter or two on this topic.
Andy Elliott
N601GE (601XL/TD, Corvair, building)
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: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL? |
Martin,
The CG is about weight and not so much aerodynamics. It's the distribution of the
weight that is the main issue.
If you increase the MTOW of an aircraft, it depends on where you add the additional
weight. If the extra weight is due to bigger Americans, then the weight will
be added rear of the empty CG (on a 601XL) thus pushing the CG rearward.
As far as the CG range is concerned, it may be partly due to regulatory differences
between USA and Europe, but I think that MTOW is also a factor in the difference
in range. If you look at the POH for most small training aircraft, you
will see two different sets of numbers for C.G. One set is for "Normal" category
and the other is for "Utility" category. The difference between the two is
that MTOW for "Utility" is always lower and the CG range greater.
The large elevator trim tab is there so that you can trim the aircraft for level
flight with full flaps; something required for the LSA category in the USA.
Martin Pohl wrote:
> How comes that the XL can have an approved C.G. range of 300 - 450 mm in the
U.S. (MTOW = 600 kg) and a much better range of 300 - 520 mm in the U.K. (MTOW
= 560 kg)?
>
> The C.G. range is a matter of aerodynamics and not of the MTOW-limit. The MTOW
mainly depends on structural strength (mainly wing bending which is the limiting
factor for the XL maximum loading). Or am I not right?
>
> Is there anybody who can explain? Is it perhaps because of the elongated elevator-trim-tab
(over the whole left elevator width)?
--------
Zodiac 601 XL - CZAW Built - Rotax 912S
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=73879#73879
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS |
please send me a copy off list
David Mikesell
23597 N. Hwy 99
Acampo, CA 95220
209-609-8774
skyguynca@skyguynca.com
www.skyguynca.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "LarryMcFarland" <larry@macsmachine.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS
>
> Hi Dick,
> In the March/April issue of Zenith Newsletter #153, there was an article
> on Vortex Generators that were added to an HDS. A few dimensions and
> drawings showing how they can be made. I remember because the area of
> the leading edge fuel tanks didn't have any. The claim was that the VGs
> would reduce stall by 5 mph and to comply with performance of LS
> aircraft might have been true even if the regulations as they stand
> would not recognize such an adaption to that purpose. With a 912
> engine, the 601HDS would fly in ground effect at 35 KTs, and fly at less
> than 40 KTs at full gross. Said he could not get it to stall with these
> installed. The aircraft is supposed to qualify for Sport Pilot with
> these. If you're interested in the article, I can scan it and send it.
>
> Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
>
>
> DICK WILBERS wrote:
>>
>> Dear List:
>>
>> Has anyone installed Vortex Generators on the 601 HDS? I have met a
>> guy from Niagara Aircraft, a Canadian Co., who says he can furnish
>> VG's for the 601 HDS. This may be interesting if he is correct.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Richard in Florida
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
I use clear prop tape on the baggage locker hinge to keep the water out. I also
installed a thin strip of foam weather seal on the bottom edges of the door (the
stuff you use on your doors and windows to stop air leaks in your house).
It's not absolutely water tight, but it helped considerably.
--------
Zodiac 601 XL - CZAW Built - Rotax 912S
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=73891#73891
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: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL? |
Hi Folks, I have installed a W & B program for the 601XL on
www.ch601.org in the builder resources section. This is a great tool for
answering many of the questions I have seen lately on this thread. It
was developed by Gary Ray and is in Excel format. Excellent Job Gary.
Mark Townsend Alma, Ontario
Zodiac 601XL C-GOXL, CH701 just started
www.ch601.org / www.ch701.com / www.Osprey2.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David X
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 10:23 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL?
Martin,
The CG is about weight and not so much aerodynamics. It's the
distribution of the weight that is the main issue.
If you increase the MTOW of an aircraft, it depends on where you add the
additional weight. If the extra weight is due to bigger Americans, then
the weight will be added rear of the empty CG (on a 601XL) thus pushing
the CG rearward.
As far as the CG range is concerned, it may be partly due to regulatory
differences between USA and Europe, but I think that MTOW is also a
factor in the difference in range. If you look at the POH for most small
training aircraft, you will see two different sets of numbers for C.G.
One set is for "Normal" category and the other is for "Utility"
category. The difference between the two is that MTOW for "Utility" is
always lower and the CG range greater.
The large elevator trim tab is there so that you can trim the aircraft
for level flight with full flaps; something required for the LSA
category in the USA.
Martin Pohl wrote:
> How comes that the XL can have an approved C.G. range of 300 - 450 mm
in the U.S. (MTOW = 600 kg) and a much better range of 300 - 520 mm in
the U.K. (MTOW = 560 kg)?
>
> The C.G. range is a matter of aerodynamics and not of the MTOW-limit.
The MTOW mainly depends on structural strength (mainly wing bending
which is the limiting factor for the XL maximum loading). Or am I not
right?
>
> Is there anybody who can explain? Is it perhaps because of the
elongated elevator-trim-tab (over the whole left elevator width)?
--------
Zodiac 601 XL - CZAW Built - Rotax 912S
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=73879#73879
--
11/11/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
11/11/2006
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: STOL 701 Wheel measurements |
Hi John,
Took a look at my wheels, not yet mounted:
About 13 lbs each for the complete assembly with brakes...
18" diameter tires inflated,
Had trouble measuring the width of the rims... close to 4.5"
I am looking for a 701 Rotax engine mount... ifyou are going to scratch
build one then build TWO and I'll buy one!
(Dont think you're going Rotax, tho!)
I have a Zenith Rotax 601 mount available for trade or sale..! (used,
one owner)
35 degrees this morning... ouch!
Jon
----- Original Message -----
From: John Bolding
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 7:07 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: STOL 701 Wheel measurements
Guys,
I'm considering a couple of scratch built options for the 701 main
gear.
I need a couple of items to pass on to the engineer that is doing
the analysis and hopefully someone can help.
The Matco Wheel used for the Tundra Tire option is MHMH6BD.75XT, I
need the weight of the wheel,tire, axel and brake assy. Also need the
width of the wheel between the rims. Outside dia of inflated tire would
be useful useful as well. OR if someone has a pair that they need to
unload I'll buy them.
This is a preliminary design exercise to see if a homebuilt carbon
gear can be made using pultruded rods into a simple mold. Goals are
weight reduction (several POUNDS is anticipated)and reduced cost over
the purchased original alum gear. THANKS I'll post the results of the
study to the group. LOW&SLOW John Bolding
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
11/10/2006
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: What should the empty CG be for the 601XL? |
Thank you for your answers.
@Andy: Good explanation. That indeed makes sense! I was just astonished that the
U.K. limitations are broader than what Chris initially definded.
Rgds
Martin
--------
Martin Pohl
Zodiac XL QBK
8645 Jona, Switzerland
www.pohltec.ch/ZodiacXL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=73895#73895
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: | 601XL Strut clearance |
I am in the process of installing my nose gear strut to the firewall. My
question is, how much clearance do you scratch builders use between the
strut (6G1-1) and the bearings (6G2-1 & 6B8-6)?
Since these bearings are not self aligning, any misalignment between the top
and bottom bearing causes the strut to bind. I don't want the strut to be
too sloppy but I also don't want it to bind. What does Zenith use for
clearance in the kit parts?
Any help will be appreciated.
Herb
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 |
|
All-
The coarsest grit ACS offers from Nuvite is G6. Several listers have
recommended F7 or F9 for the first pass, which as far as I know is only
available from the Nuvite website. Something about the difference
between "Coated" and "Uncoated" aluminum. All Zenith aluminum is
uncoated.
I finally got far enough ahead on my winterization to actually work
on the project, and have found out that G6 is about worthless for taking
out normal "Shop rash" scratches. You can polish your guts out and the
metal just looks back and says "I dare you".
My horoscope today says that I'm going to throw good money after
bad. Just ordered 1lb of F9. Hope I didn't.
Bill Naumuk
HDS Fuselage
Townville, Pa
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: 601XL Strut clearance |
Herbert,
I'd suggest you put nylon bearings on both top and bottom of the front
strut. The nylon can be sized to have a drag-friction fit
and it will not wear appreciably. The aluminum originally in the plans
was prone to wear rapidly and be very noisy when it dried
out. I've links below that may help you decide what you may want to do.
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/gear/full/upbrg.gif
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/gear/full/stratstops.gif
Regards,
Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Herbert Heaton wrote:
>
> I am in the process of installing my nose gear strut to the firewall.
> My question is, how much clearance do you scratch builders use between
> the strut (6G1-1) and the bearings (6G2-1 & 6B8-6)?
> Since these bearings are not self aligning, any misalignment between
> the top and bottom bearing causes the strut to bind. I don't want the
> strut to be too sloppy but I also don't want it to bind. What does
> Zenith use for clearance in the kit parts?
>
> Any help will be appreciated.
> Herb
>
> Do not archive
>
>
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: 601XL Strut clearance |
Larry is correct on all front, I also recommend a lithium grease, you can use it
on the front wheel strut as well as the steering strut. Alot of builders have
had the problem of the wheel steering being har to move with the rudder pedals,
the nylon and prpoer lubing elliminates that on al points.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: LarryMcFarland <larry@macsmachine.com>
>Sent: Nov 12, 2006 3:35 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 601XL Strut clearance
>
>
>Herbert,
>I'd suggest you put nylon bearings on both top and bottom of the front
>strut. The nylon can be sized to have a drag-friction fit
>and it will not wear appreciably. The aluminum originally in the plans
>was prone to wear rapidly and be very noisy when it dried
>out. I've links below that may help you decide what you may want to do.
>http://www.macsmachine.com/images/gear/full/upbrg.gif
>http://www.macsmachine.com/images/gear/full/stratstops.gif
>Regards,
>
>Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
>
>Herbert Heaton wrote:
>>
>> I am in the process of installing my nose gear strut to the firewall.
>> My question is, how much clearance do you scratch builders use between
>> the strut (6G1-1) and the bearings (6G2-1 & 6B8-6)?
>> Since these bearings are not self aligning, any misalignment between
>> the top and bottom bearing causes the strut to bind. I don't want the
>> strut to be too sloppy but I also don't want it to bind. What does
>> Zenith use for clearance in the kit parts?
>>
>> Any help will be appreciated.
>> Herb
>>
>> Do not archive
>>
>>
>
>
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: Rotax 912 Fuel Pump Inlet/Outlet |
All,
Thanks for the responses, on list and off. I amazed at how much everyone else
knows and how little I know.
Tommy Walker in Alabama
Do Not Archive
"It takes a village to build Tommy's Airplane...."
--------
Tommy Walker
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=73957#73957
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: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS |
Hey Larry,
If you do scan the newsletter would you send the item to me please.
daveaustin2@can.rogers.com
Thanks
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 |
|
Well it's my turn for the Daily Picture. I was unable to get the 601 out
of the shop before the 701 moved in. Yes my garage is getting quite
crowded.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
11/11/2006
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: | Fw: Vortex Generators - Test flight 1 |
Did my first test of the Stolspeed VGs today. Att. are the results.
Dave Austin 601HDS - 912, Spitfire Mk VIII
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2@can.rogers.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 8:48 PM
Subject: Vortex Generators - Test flight 1
> G'Day John,
> Having installed the VGs last Saturday when temp was 51 degrees F, the
> weather finally allowed me to take a test flight. It was, however, cut
> short to 20 minutes when the ceiling dropped to 2500 ft. Don't like doing
> stalls starting at 2000 ft ASL!
> As a base, my 601HDS with Rotax 912, Arplast in-flight adjustable prop,
> radiator and oil cooler inside the cowl and some drag reducing fairings
> normally cruises at 120 mph IAS at 26 inches manifold pressure and 5500
rpm.
> I re-checked stall speed before VG installation at 3000 ft and air temp of
> 49 degrees F as being "stall buffeting at 58 mph IAS (all speeds IAS) and
> full stall at 56 mph".
> Test conditions air temp was 40 degrees F. Altitude 3000 ft. Atmos.
> pressure approx equal. Takeoff weight equal to test flight.
> First impression was an increase in climb rate at 80 mph. Rough attempt
to
> measure would be an extra 200 ft/min.
> Pre-stall buffeting now begins at 54 mph and is significantly more
apparent.
> Full stall at 52 mph, no more abrupt than without the VGs.
> There appears to be no measurable difference in cruise speed - the 120
mph.
> Since I only made one landing I will make no comment as to stability, but
> greased it on using my normal over the fence speed of 75 mph. No VGs
parted
> company.
> So far, certainly meeting expectations!
> When the weather allows will do some more tests.
> Cheers.
> Dave Austin 601HDS - 912, Spitfire Mk VIII
>
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: Daily Picture |
Thanks Mark for starting up Daily Pictures again. Here are a few from my p
roject:=0A=0ABrs Installation continues:=0Ahttp://www.cooknwithgas.com/11_1
1_06_BRS_Bracket.JPG=0Ahttp://www.cooknwithgas.com/11_11_06_BRS_Bracket2.JP
G=0Ahttp://www.cooknwithgas.com/11_11_06_BRS.JPG=0A=0AWarning - large photo
s. =0A=0AScott Laughlin=0Awww.cooknwithgas.com=0ABRS work continues.=0Ahttp
://www.cooknwithgas.com/BRS.html=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Z
odie Rocket <zodierocket@hsfx.ca>=0A=0A<!--=0A=0A /* Style Definitions */
=0A p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal=0A{=0Amargin:0in;=0Amargin-
bottom:.0001pt;=0A=0Afont-size:12.0pt;=0Afont-family:"Times New Roman";=0A}
=0Aa:link, span.MsoHyperlink=0A{color:blue;=0Atext-decoration:underline;
=0A}=0Aa:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed=0A{color:purple;=0Atext-deco
ration:underline;=0A}=0Ap.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
=0A{margin:0in;=0Amargin-bottom:.0001pt;=0A=0Afont-size:10.0pt;=0Afont-f
amily:"Courier New";=0A}=0Aspan.GramE=0A{=0A}=0A _filtered {=0Amargin:1.
0in 77.95pt 1.0in 77.95pt;=0A=0A=0A}=0Adiv.Section1=0A{}=0A-->=0A=0A=0A
=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A =0A=0A =0A =0A=0AWell it's my turn for the Daily Picture
. I was=0Aunable to get the 601 out of the shop before the 701 moved in. Ye
s my garage is getting quite crowded.=0A=0A=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: Vortex Generators - Test flight 1 |
Dave - This showed up as blank ont he web forum. Can you try again?
Thanks,
cl
--------
701 Scratch Builder
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=73991#73991
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 |
|
Also lets remember to keep the drain holes clean, dirt and pieces of insects can
pevent the water to come out.
Saludos
Gary Gower.
George Swinford <grs-pms@comcast.net> wrote:
Good point, Larry, and thanks for the reminder.
George
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "LarryMcFarland"
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Wing locker
>
> Chris,
> Don't forget to put drain holes in your baggage area same as all the
> other places you can collect water. What matter if it takes
> water that leaves thru a drain. Water will condense in your plane in
> all the other blind spots. A 1/8" drain hole will alleviate this.
>
> Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
> do not archive
>
> Dan Ribb wrote:
> > Hinge? Why did you use a hinge? Zodiacs don't use no stink'n
> > hinges! *:~)*
> >
> >
> > Dan Ribb
> > Fresno, CA
> > 601XL tail kit 20% done
> > - do not post -
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > Hi all
> > Well the wing locker on my XL is now complete.. looks real nice but
> > since I will not be able to hanger the bird when it rains, it got me
> > to thinking how can I stop rain from going in the hinge (fwd edge)?
> > The sides and back have a strip and I will put foam door seal for
> > weather proofing, but how to stop the rain getting in from the front??
> > and as you know rain getting in will cause corrosion and green
> > scotchbrite to grow.
> > Chris
> > Down Under
> >
> > *
> > =========
> >
> > *
>
>
> --
>
>
---------------------------------
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: Vortex Generators on 601 HDS |
Dick,
I have just installed the Stolspeed VGs from Australia, but have not
been able to fly yet due to weather. I'm doing the "experimental" for
him. Will post the results here as well.
I chose the Stolspeed because they are plastic and glue on. Will not
cut fingers etc.
Dave Austin 601HDS - 912, Spitfire Mk VIII
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: | Any News on the CH-750? |
It's been almost a year and a half since Mr. Heintz announced he was working on
the CH-750, a new aircraft sized between the 701 & 801.
Does anyone know the status? Will it be available in kit form?
--------
Kevin Thorp
Charleston, SC
former C-150 driver
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=74033#74033
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: | Sportpilots and eligable aircraft |
Gentlemen, and Ladies,
I ran across this post off sight and its from a while back but I might be
able to she some light on the subject of sport pilot eligible aircraft.
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matr...
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matr...] On Behalf Of Weston, Jim
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Cross SP Registration
Something doesn't fit. If this is the case, how is it that Aeronca's,
Ercoupe's, T-Crafts, etc. are listed as LSA eligible? They sure weren't
originally certified within the LSA definition.
This is a really confusing subject. Going to the FAA website sure
doesn't help. I've dug through the CFRs and used their search engine
with little found.
You will find, on page 44793 of the:
Federal Register: July 27, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 143) Page 44771-44882
Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft
a definition for maximum takeoff weight provided by the FAA that, in my humble
opinion, is used to determine the eligilibility of any Small aircraft (12,500
lbs or less) As strange as that sounds, there is a formula to determine maximum
takeoff weight and its defined as the sum of 1) empty weight of the aircraft,
weight of full fuel tanks, (just consider them filled and use that weight),
weight of pilot and, if applicable, a passenger, and the weight of any baggage.
On page 44793 it reads:
Some commentators stated that lacking a definition of maximum take off weight,
aircraft with fairly high performance characteristics could meet the definition
of light-sport aircraft by limiting the approved weight and payload of the
airplane. The FAA considers this a valid concern and has provided some additional
constraints on the weight as detailed below. The maximum weight of a light-sport
aircraft is the sum of :
(1) Aircraft empty weight;
(2) Weight of the passenger for each seat installed;
(3) Baggage allowance for each passenger; and
(4) Full fuel, including a minimum of the half hour fuel reserve required for day
visual flight rules in FAR 91.151(a)(1)
This will give you a mass for the aircraft, and if its less than 1320 lbs
(land), and it meets the rest of the parameters, it is sport pilot eligible.
That doesnt make it LSA compliant, but it meets the definition in FAR 1.1 for
lightsport aircraft. There is also a chart that shows any aircraft, 12,500 lba
is eligible to try to meet the definition. Good luck. If you apply this FAA
formula in your thinking, it put a whole new spin on how the regulation reads.
The point is, it is not maximum weight as on a tcds, or the design weight of an
experimental amateur-built, but the weight of the aircraft at the time of takeoff.
Example: I have a Kitfox series 5, with a design weight of 1400 lbs, But the
1400 lbs means nothing to the Feds. You are not penalized because you have an
efficient aircraft.
If one keeps the empty weight of the aircraft low enough, you will have enough
payload to meet the definition of maximum takeoff weight as provided in .
Federal Register: July 27, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 143) Page 44771-44882
Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft
There is an ongoing discussion about this on the Kitfox list. Its me against
the world in there.
One needs to read this Final Rule to understand the full extent of LSA issues,
it will clear up any question if read carefully and in the FAA state of mind.
It will also contradict much published articles that just confuse the issue,
and us, because many writers really dont have a clue.
I have a lot to say on the issues and I leave no stone unturned. If you wish to
know more, I willing to talk, but I dont want to start an argument.
I can pass along the best link to find the best .pdf copy of The Final rule. It
does make a difference.
Thanks, sorry for intruding.
Steve
--------
Steve: Former Fi-156 'Storch' driver (...talk about folding wings!!!)
New owner, not builder- Kitfox V / 912UL / Warp Dr 3 blade. Thanks to the late
great Ray Mudge, Brighton Mi.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=74036#74036
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 |
|
Most aircraft aluminum is 2024 alclad, which has a coating of pure
aluminum. This coating is soft and polishes up relatively easily. The
6064 used on the Zenith aircraft is harder and takes more work to
polish. I can tell you that it does polish up nicely and once you get
it there, it holds up well. The F9 should do the job nicely if you
have a decent compounding polisher and bonnets.
Check out http://www.vintagetrailersupply.com/ and click on the
"Polishing Center" link. They have all grades of Nuvite and some good
tools for applying it. Check out the velcro backing plate and wool
polishing pads, they work very well.
Click on this link: http://www.zenithair.com/events.htm and look at
the top photo at the bottom of the page. That's my polished Zodiac on
the left in front of the Zenith hangar.
On Nov 12, 2006, at 12:25 PM, Bill Naumuk wrote:
> All-
> The coarsest grit ACS offers from Nuvite is G6. Several listers
> have recommended F7 or F9 for the first pass, which as far as I
> know is only available from the Nuvite website. Something about the
> difference between "Coated" and "Uncoated" aluminum. All Zenith
> aluminum is uncoated.
> I finally got far enough ahead on my winterization to actually
> work on the project, and have found out that G6 is about worthless
> for taking out normal "Shop rash" scratches. You can polish your
> guts out and the metal just looks back and says "I dare you".
> My horoscope today says that I'm going to throw good money
> after bad. Just ordered 1lb of F9. Hope I didn't.
>
> Bill Naumuk
> HDS Fuselage
> Townville, Pa
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
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! --
|