Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:26 AM - Re: VG's (Gary Gower)
2. 04:58 AM - Re: Re: VGs (Joe and Joan)
3. 05:53 AM - Re: vg's (T E S T I N G W I T H B O T H S L A T S & VG's I N S TA L L E D) (Condon, Philip M.)
4. 06:16 AM - Culver Props- gap between rear of wood prop and crankshaft flange? (nick@aoaircrafters.com)
5. 06:16 AM - Re: Re: VGs (raymondj)
6. 06:56 AM - Re: VGs (Avidmagnum)
7. 07:29 AM - Re: Anyone want to trade Gasolators? (Juan Vega)
8. 07:42 AM - Re: Culver Props- gap between rear of wood prop and crankshaft flange? (Randy Stout)
9. 08:00 AM - Re: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! (LRM)
10. 08:21 AM - Re: Anyone want to trade Gasolators? (Gig Giacona)
11. 08:28 AM - Re: Wing Panel weight (David Mikesell)
12. 08:59 AM - Re: Re: Anyone want to trade Gasolators? (Robin Bellach)
13. 10:08 AM - VG's/lights,etc (MaxNr@aol.com)
14. 11:18 AM - Re: Re: vg's (T E S T I N G W I T H B O T H S L A T S & VG's I N S TA L L E D) (John Gilpin)
15. 11:21 AM - Re: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! (Gary Gower)
16. 11:30 AM - Re: Re: vg's (Gary Gower)
17. 11:31 AM - Re: Re: vg's (John Gilpin)
18. 11:46 AM - Aiming a 601 Landing Light (Chuck & Lana Maggart)
19. 11:50 AM - Re: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! (Big Gee)
20. 01:16 PM - Selling a complete 601XL Kit (Williamson Brian - brwill)
21. 01:18 PM - Re: Aiming a 601 Landing Light (Gig Giacona)
22. 01:24 PM - Re: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! (Gig Giacona)
23. 03:00 PM - Re: Re: Aiming a 601 Landing Light (Robin Bellach)
24. 03:12 PM - Re: vg's (Avidmagnum)
25. 07:56 PM - POH-computer stuff (Dave Thompson)
26. 08:40 PM - Re: POH-computer stuff (Craig Payne)
27. 09:43 PM - Re: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! (Christian Tremblay)
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 |
|
Probably yes, Bob. But for me, playing around with airfoils in wings is more
for a Professional Test Pilot wearing a parachute :-) that for me...
Saludos
Gary Gower.
NYTerminat@aol.com wrote: Gary,
There is always room for improvement. If the vg's give you the same stol performance
and allows you to go faster and uses less fuel, I don't see too many
downsides.
Bob Spudis
N701ZX CH701/912S 92hrs
In a message dated 12/11/2006 1:02:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, ggower_99@yahoo.com
writes:
Once I see data from a wind tunnel or from ZAC, then I will probably think
about it. I enjoy my 701 so much "as is" that just sill be reading about
this mod for a while. I chosed this plane (701), I like it, I ejnoy it,
why mess with it?
Saludos
Gary Gower
Flying from Chapala, Mexico.
701 912S With Slats and
---------------------------------
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 |
|
Eddie, The slats weight(with paint) 14 lbs. They are so close to the C of G
that their effect will be Minimal (Johns word). Looking at the change in
structural integrity of the lift, about the only thing we agree on is that
the slats were designed to tunnel the wind for more lift, not supply lift
itself. Please note that the slats have no spar and they are attached to a
wing with a spar and has 4 attachments each side to hold the slat to the
wing, not the other way. I am removing my attachments today. My opinion is
"No loss in structural integrity", but this is not something I will test
till the wing comes off. Joe from FL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eddie G." <silentlight@verizon.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 1:41 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: VGs
>
> Question: When you remove the slats, you're decreasing the empty weight by
> X amount. So when you're doing these comparisons, do you need to add X
> amount of dead weight to the plane so that you're not comparing apples and
> oranges? I assume the weight has some effect on performance of the plane
> since for more weight you need more lift, which means more drag. At least
> it should affect the rate of climb and service ceiling, if nothing else.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81214#81214
>
>
>
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: vg's (T E S T I N G W I T H B O T H S L A T S & |
VG's I N S TA L L E D)
Has anyone tested the slow handling qualities with both the slats and
VG's installed ? Granted there may be a 5 MPH penalty on the top end
(speed). However the slow handling ( hovering ?) capabilities may be
available with both slats and VG's.
Regarding the insurance issues posted yesterday; Isn't the "Canadian"
company providing a "approved" kit, from the "factory" sans the slats
and with VG's ? The answer is yes, so there may "argument" room with
the insurance companies ( see post from yesterday regarding insurance
companies denying coverage due to removal of 701 slats)
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: | Culver Props- gap between rear of wood prop and crankshaft |
flange?
Prop Gurus,
I recently installed a 58-57 diam/pitch prop on my continental 0-200-A
engine (601HD). After running the engine (the engine ran fine-sounded
great), I noticed a small gap between the rear of the wood prop hub and
the front of the crankshaft flange. The gap was about .02" I think the
crankshaft flange radius isn't matching the wood prop's radius.
Has anyone run into this problem? Is this a problem (the engine seemed
to run just fine- no problems on the first run with the new prop)? Is
there a fix to this problem?
Thanks,
~Nick
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 |
|
MessageGreetings,
The argument sounds like Engineers vs. Lawyers. It'll be interesting to
see how it it works out.
Does anyone have any data on changes in the best angle of climb
performance with only VGs.
Thanks,
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Noel Loveys
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:37 PM
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: VGs
Those figures are significant. Especially for such a thick short wing.
Could be the difference in making a good forced approach and just flying to
the crash site.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Gilpin
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 11:08 PM
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: VGs
Yes, removing the slats does improve the glide ratio.
The following figures are for a 701.
Speed is in Knots. Slats On / Slats Off
40 5.1 / 6.7
45 5.7 / 7.6
50 6.3 / 7.8
55 7.0 / 7.9
60 6.4 / 7.6
65 6.0 / 6.4
70 5.5 / 6.4
Cheers
JG
Savannah 19-4296
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matron
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 |
|
hi John
My friend sugested that I bend some thin aluminum strips and tape them on each
side of the old slat attachments as I cut and then ground them down. Sure helped
me. Tom in Florida
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81255#81255
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: Anyone want to trade Gasolators? |
whre are you placing the Gascolator?
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@cox.net>
>Sent: Dec 12, 2006 12:06 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Anyone want to trade Gasolators?
>
>
>I have the Gasolator as shipped from Zenith with the tabs welded on. I'm not going
to be placing mine as specified in the plans and don't need the tabs.
>
>So some lucky plans builder who needs the tabs can trade with me and not have
to weld it.
>
>Send me an e-mail.
>
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>--------
>W.R. "Gig" Giacona
>601XL Under Construction
>See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81045#81045
>
>
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: | Culver Props- gap between rear of wood prop and crankshaft |
flange?
Nick
First off, I'm not a prop guru.
What's the tracking look like? The blade tips should probably be within 1/8
inch of each other. I think I would pull the prop and check to see if there
are signs of it being hung up on something. You might also check both prop
and hub with a straight edge. There shouldn't be any low spots. They need to
be flush together and properly torqued or the prop will shift around while
the engine runs.
Isn't a 58 inch prop kind of small for an o-200?
Randy Stout
San Antonio TX
www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21
n282rs at earthlink.net
-
Prop Gurus,
I recently installed a 58-57 diam/pitch prop on my continental 0-200-A
engine (601HD). After running the engine (the engine ran fine-sounded
great), I noticed a small gap between the rear of the wood prop hub and the
front of the crankshaft flange. The gap was about .02" I think the
crankshaft flange radius isn't matching the wood prop's radius.
Has anyone run into this problem? Is this a problem (the engine seemed to
run just fine- no problems on the first run with the new prop)? Is there a
fix to this problem?
Thanks,
~Nick
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! |
Well sir, with all due respect, if you are being driven up a wall, do
yourself an favor and get off the list. Then your problem is solved.
Personally I find all this chatter to be entertaining and sometimes
educational. If someone says something that bothers me, I just move on
to the next one unless I feel as if I have something to contribute, no
big deal. Then, I try to chose my words carefully, because I realize
how easy it is to offend some people. You might want to consider using
a program I use called mailwasher, it lets you preview your e-mail at
the server level. If I see a subject matter I'm not interested in, I
just click delete and it never gets to my computer. It might keep you
off the wall.
I have been following this VG thing with interest. However, I am on the
fence because I don't have Zenith wings. Someday I may build another
701 and may not be able to get PegaStol wings so I will do a
modification of some sort to the wings. I have never been a fan of the
Zenith wings. I really think that if one goes with vgs then they need
to do something different with the leading edges other than just
removing the slats. Seems to me, especially for some of you scratch
builders, that a cap to form a aerodynamic leading edge would not be
difficult to construct. It could even be made into a gas tank or
storage. Just food for thought.
Larry, N1345L, www.skyhawg.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Big Gee
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look
away!
YOU GUYS DRIVE ME UP THE WALL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
----- Original Message ----
From: LRM <lrm@skyhawg.com>
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:38:42 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look
away!
It makes absolutely no logical sense to build the wings first.
However, it really doesn't matter which one you build first, if you
follow the plans all parts will fit together. If Chris really said "do
the wings first as it was easier to build the fuselage to fit the wings,
than to try and build the wings to fit the fuselage.", then there is a
problem with his plans. Jon's rationale for building the fuselage first
is simply a matter of self encouragement. If you have a fuselage
sitting there on landing gear so you can sit in it, roll it around, it
gives you more incentive to keep building. The hard part is done. I
built my fuselage first and my wings (PegaStol) bolted right up, zero
problem. No matter what you build, you normally build the core first.
Seems to me that one would want to build parts to fit the frame not the
frame to fit the parts.
Just me 2 cents worth for what it's worth, Larry N1345L
www.skyhawg.com
---- Original Message -----
From: Big Gee
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else -
look away!
Bob, my vote is with Mark T. Do the wings first, hang them up out
of the way, than do the fuselage. I don't know about Jon's video, I have
never seen it. I am sure he has some good points in it. I do know in
the "old days" Chris said do the wings first as it was easier to build
the fuselage to fit the wings, than to try and build the wings to fit
the fuselage. Good luck in what ever you decide.
Fritz
----- Original Message ----
From: "robert.eli@adelphia.net" <robert.eli@adelphia.net>
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:58:48 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else -
look away!
Jon,
Thanks for the advice. I had not thought about doing the fuselage
next, just because I thought that the wings were the usual next step. I
will strongly consider doing the fuselage next since I need all of the
motivational help I can get. On the "remove the slats and VG issue",
Mark Townsend has convinced me to build my CH701 Kit "per plans", with
the slats. The only reason the "slat removal and VG approach" seemed
attractive was that I don't plan to push the envelop and "hang the plane
on the prop" at high angles of attack at low altitude because it is
obviously the most risky position to be in if you have a engine-out.
Thanks for the input and best wishes for the Holidays.
Bob Eli
---- Jon Croke <Jon@joncroke.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> I am honored that you would ask my opinion about this, however I
am the
> LEAST qualified to express an opinion about this topic. I have no
formal
> aerodynamics education... and you may recall I am sometimes
challenged at
> keeping the plane in the air for more than a few hours!
>
> If you have not built the fuselage yet, consider building that
before
> building the wings. Obviously they both (wings and fuse) have to
be
> completed before flying, but I have found it makes a lot more
emotional
> sense to have the body of the plane done and sitting there whilst
you embark
> on the wings. (Something to sit in, and hangar fly in around the
yard,
> maybe even start the engine) I have done it both ways... building
the fuse
> first is much more rewarding, in my opinion!
>
> Jon
>
>
>
> >
> > Hey Jon Croke,
> >
> > I've been reading about all of this flight experience with the
slats
> > removed and vortex generators in their place. I'm finally
finishing up
> > the tail and thinking about the wings (yes, I know I'm as slow
as you know
> > what). But, I am actually thinking about building my wings
minus the
> > slats. Since you are on your third CH701, and obviously know
the thing
> > inside out, what is your take on this no-slats approach?
> >
> > Bob Eli
> >
> >
>
>
&This Month = * AeroElectric
="http://www.homebuilthelp.com/" target=_blank>www.homebuilthelp.com
http://www.bsp; -Matt Dralle, sp; - The
Zenith-List Email .com/Navigator?Zenith-List"
=========
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Have a burning question? Go to Yahoo! Answers and get answers from
real people who know.
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matron
w="http://www.matronics.com/contribution" target=_blank
rel=nofollow>hics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List" target=_blank
rel=nofollow>http://www.ma===============
========
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
12/7/2006
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: Anyone want to trade Gasolators? |
Forward of the fire wall. I've attached a photo from flycorvair.com of the location.
amyvega2005(at)earthlink. wrote:
> whre are you placing the Gascolator?
>
> Juan
>
> --
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81275#81275
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/firewall_photo_176.jpg
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: Wing Panel weight |
Thanks for the info
David Mikesell
Acampo, CA
----- Original Message -----
From: John Gilpin
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 11:37 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Wing Panel weight
The 701 wing that we weighed came in at 33 kg (73 lb), including slat
and aileron. The slats weigh approx 3.5 kg (7.7 lb) each side. Of
course the amount of paint can make quite a difference....
JG
Australia
----- Original Message -----
From: David Mikesell
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 2:21 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Wing Panel weight
Ok guys, since we are on the subject of wings and vg's and
slats......Someone with their wings off or just incase you have already
weighed them. How much does a wing panel weigh????
Thanks in Advance.
David Mikesell
Acampo, CA
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matron
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: Anyone want to trade Gasolators? |
Me too, just like that, not sticking out below.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 10:20 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Anyone want to trade Gasolators?
>
> Forward of the fire wall. I've attached a photo from flycorvair.com of the
> location.
>
>
> amyvega2005(at)earthlink. wrote:
>> whre are you placing the Gascolator?
>>
>> Juan
>>
>> --
>
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81275#81275
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/firewall_photo_176.jpg
>
>
>
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 |
|
Very informative to sit on the sidelines and soak up VG/slat info. Glad that
601XL doesn't require me to be decisive on this. I do think that VGs would be
worth trying on the XL. They did wonders for my friends Piper Pacer.
I have started on rudder and engine mount simultaneous. Plan to work toward
middle.
I will build with full lights, strobes and landing lights because my area
(Pensacola Class C) is real busy. Also, when I had my Champ and Luscombe, I got
home late a few times and had no elec systems. Bad planning and headwinds.
I have a prop/engine combination from a Grum. AA1. Lyc 0-235 C2C with McCauly
71/54. A climb prop good enough for flight test. I consult a spread sheet
downloaded from SPORT AVIATION for prop selection. Looking at a WarpSpeed 66 or
68 dia. for better cruise later on.
If anybody comes up with a wing fold deal like the 701 or Mustang ll or Thorp
T18, I am most interested.
Bob Dingley
XL/Lyc/Eng mt&rud
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: vg's (T E S T I N G W I T H B O T H S L A T S |
& VG's I N S TA L L E D)
I've tried that, and no extra benefit from VGs + slats. The slats already
allow the high angle of attack so VGs can't improve on that. More details
in www.stolspeed.com , "Slats vs VGs" page.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Condon, Philip M." <pcondon@mitre.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 12:52 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: vg's (T E S T I N G W I T H B O T H S L A T S &
VG's I N S TA L L E D)
>
> Has anyone tested the slow handling qualities with both the slats and
> VG's installed ? Granted there may be a 5 MPH penalty on the top end
> (speed). However the slow handling ( hovering ?) capabilities may be
> available with both slats and VG's.
>
> Regarding the insurance issues posted yesterday; Isn't the "Canadian"
> company providing a "approved" kit, from the "factory" sans the slats
> and with VG's ? The answer is yes, so there may "argument" room with
> the insurance companies ( see post from yesterday regarding insurance
> companies denying coverage due to removal of 701 slats)
>
>
>
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: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! |
Given my previous experience, if the builder has the space (fortunate I have plenty),
is better to build first the fuselage.
The good part about this is that mean time we are building the flying surfaces
we can work on the most time consuming parts that get the builder desparate
at the end of the project: this are (for me) the Instrument panel, the electric
system and the engine instalation.
This way there is the chance to work in several tasks, given the material we have,
no way to get bored in a single task that takes lots of time...
Also we can put some visitors to work (there is always a friend visiting to the
shop at least twice a week) in some easy task they can do, while we work in another
one, just keep an eye to prevent errors.
.
Our visitor "parade" include several friends, a couple of teen age sons from friends
and 2 student pilots from the local flying school, the other way they
just talk and talk, taking valuable building time to the process. They like to
learn and build.
If the space is little, like a single car garage, the surfaces (wing and empenage)
go first and get hanged out of the way while the fuselage is built.
Both ways can work great to any of us, just keep building constantly, leting
the projectg in idle for several days or week harm very much the building and
there is the danger of not finishing the plane.
Saludos
Gary Gower.
I agree that the fuselage is nice to have built first, but remember that
this is not Jon's first plane. Unless you buy Jon's DVD ( which I always
recommend as a guide to help) then you will not learn things that
building the wings will teach you to apply to the fuselage's
construction. Also Wings can hang from the ceiling or in a wing cradle
and be pushed to the side of the shop. Jon has an incredible amount of
room in his shop and fit 4 fuselages and still have room for making his
wings. Most of us don't have that room and the fuselage will just get
damaged from hanger rash trying to build around it. IF you want to build
your fuselage first, please do no one will stop you. But be aware first
timers that there may be added difficulties in doing so.
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 Jon Croke
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 1:26 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look
away!
Hi Bob,
I am honored that you would ask my opinion about this, however I am the
LEAST qualified to express an opinion about this topic. I have no
formal
aerodynamics education... and you may recall I am sometimes challenged
at
keeping the plane in the air for more than a few hours!
If you have not built the fuselage yet, consider building that before
building the wings. Obviously they both (wings and fuse) have to be
completed before flying, but I have found it makes a lot more emotional
sense to have the body of the plane done and sitting there whilst you
embark
on the wings. (Something to sit in, and hangar fly in around the yard,
maybe even start the engine) I have done it both ways... building the
fuse
first is much more rewarding, in my opinion!
Jon
>
> Hey Jon Croke,
>
> I've been reading about all of this flight experience with the slats
> removed and vortex generators in their place. I'm finally finishing
up
> the tail and thinking about the wings (yes, I know I'm as slow as you
know
> what). But, I am actually thinking about building my wings minus the
> slats. Since you are on your third CH701, and obviously know the
thing
> inside out, what is your take on this no-slats approach?
>
> Bob Eli
>
>
--
12/11/2006
--
12/11/2006
--
12/11/2006
---------------------------------
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 |
|
Or a little video in YouTube....
Saludos
Gary Gower.
"n801bh@netzero.com" <n801bh@netzero.com> wrote: With 1700 hours of testing you
surely have at least ONE picture of a 701 actually flying in the air with the
slats removed.
I am still waiting to see it. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
-- "secatur" <appraise1@bigpond.com> wrote:
Well, I guess I'll just have to change my mind and build the slats and throw these
VG's away !
1700+ hours of independant, documented testing WITHOUT 1 negative report ain't
gonna convince me!
And when my 701 is finished I will park it right next to my Wright Flyer, and my
Model T ford (Black of course!) right under the big sign that says "EXPERIMENTAL..do
not change or alter ever...or else!!"
ps: Can somebody please post some BAD results with VG's instead of Slats .... so
I can feel justified??
Wowie Zowie !
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=================================================nbsp;Please Support Your Lists This Month nbsp;the Contribution link below to find onbsp; * Aeroware Enterprises www.k= -Matt Dralle, List ======================== - The Zeatronics List Features Navigator to browse
---------------------------------
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now.
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 |
|
For a photo have a look at www.stolspeed.com , "Benefits of VGs"
page......
----- Original Message -----
From: n801bh@netzero.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 1:44 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: vg's
With 1700 hours of testing you surely have at least ONE picture of a
701 actually flying in the air with the slats removed.
I am still waiting to see it. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
-- "secatur" <appraise1@bigpond.com> wrote:
Well, I guess I'll just have to change my mind and build the slats and
throw these VG's away !
1700+ hours of independant, documented testing WITHOUT 1 negative
report ain't gonna convince me!
And when my 701 is finished I will park it right next to my Wright
Flyer, and my Model T ford (Black of course!) right under the big sign
that says "EXPERIMENTAL..do not change or alter ever...or else!!"
ps: Can somebody please post some BAD results with VG's instead of
Slats .... so I can feel justified??
Wowie Zowie !
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p==========
==============nbsp;Please Support Your Lists
This Month nbsp;the Contribution link below to find onbsp; * Aeroware
Enterprises www.k= -Matt Dralle, List
========================
- The Zeatronics List Features Navigator to browse
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-Lis==========
==
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: | Aiming a 601 Landing Light |
The recent discussions about landing lights brings up a question from
me. How does one aim the landing light on a 601? Aiming the taxi light
is pretty obvious, but is there any way to aim the landing light other
than trial and error?
Chuck Maggart, 601XL/Jabiru
painted and slowly moving to hangar
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! |
Building wings or fuselage first ????? Some folks drive me up the wall bec
ause they have to get their "2 cents worth" in no matter what. Especially
when the answer calls for a opinion. The tread was:=0A=0APerson "A", asked
if he should build his wings without slats.--------- Jon C. wrote and told
him, he should build the fuselage first.--------- Mark T. wrote and told hi
m, he should build the wings first and the reasons why.------ IMPORTANT HER
E IS THE FACT--- JON C. AND MARK T. HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR EACH OTHER---
I believe, their bussiness' compliment each other.-------- I wrote I agre
ed with Mark T. and said what Chris H. said in one of his early constructio
n manuals---------- Jon C. wrote in that Mark's reasons made sence.------Pe
rson "A" wrote back, saying he was going to build his wings first----------
---- I take my hat off to that gentleman-------- He asked a question, got t
wo different answers to his question and he made his decision, all in abo
ut 2 to 3 days. PERSON "A" POSTED HIS DECISION------- I would have thought
this would have ended this thread, but NO other folks have to try to keep
it going--------- Anyone can build their airplane in any sequence they
want. Chris H. has his reasons, Jon C., Mark T., you and I all have our r
easons--------- If sitting in the fuselage and "playing" hanger pilot are m
ore important than building the wings and being able to store them "up" out
of the way, than go for it.=0AFritz=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0A
From: LRM <lrm@skyhawg.com>=0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wednesd
ay, December 13, 2006 10:39:59 AM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 build
ers ONLY - everyone else - look away!=0A=0A=0AWell sir, with all due respec
t, if you are being driven up a wall, do yourself an favor and get off the
list. Then your problem is solved. Personally I find all this chatter to
be entertaining and sometimes educational. If someone says something that
bothers me, I just move on to the next one unless I feel as if I have somet
hing to contribute, no big deal. Then, I try to chose my words carefully,
because I realize how easy it is to offend some people. You might want to
consider using a program I use called mailwasher, it lets you preview your
e-mail at the server level. If I see a subject matter I'm not interested i
n, I just click delete and it never gets to my computer. It might keep you
off the wall.=0A =0AI have been following this VG thing with interest. Ho
wever, I am on the fence because I don't have Zenith wings. Someday I may
build another 701 and may not be able to get PegaStol wings so I will do a
modification of some sort to the wings. I have never been a fan of the Zen
ith wings. I really think that if one goes with vgs then they need to do s
omething different with the leading edges other than just removing the slat
s. Seems to me, especially for some of you scratch builders, that a cap to
form a aerodynamic leading edge would not be difficult to construct. It c
ould even be made into a gas tank or storage. Just food for thought. =0A
=0ALarry, N1345L, www.skyhawg.com =0A =0A =0A =0A----- Original Message
----- =0AFrom: Big Gee =0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Tuesday, D
ecember 12, 2006 10:03 PM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY
- everyone else - look away!=0A=0A=0AYOU GUYS DRIVE ME UP THE WALL !!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: LRM <lrm@skyhawg.com>
=0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:38:4
2 PM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - lo
ok away!=0A=0A=0AIt makes absolutely no logical sense to build the wings fi
rst. However, it really doesn't matter which one you build first, if you f
ollow the plans all parts will fit together. If Chris really said "do the
wings first as it was easier to build the fuselage to fit the wings, than t
o try and build the wings to fit the fuselage.", then there is a problem wi
th his plans. Jon's rationale for building the fuselage first is simply a
matter of self encouragement. If you have a fuselage sitting there on land
ing gear so you can sit in it, roll it around, it gives you more incentive
to keep building. The hard part is done. I built my fuselage first and m
y wings (PegaStol) bolted right up, zero problem. No matter what you build
, you normally build the core first. Seems to me that one would want to bu
ild parts to fit the frame not the frame to fit the parts. =0A =0AJust me
2 cents worth for what it's worth, Larry N1345L www.skyhawg.com=0A =0A =0A
=0A---- Original Message ----- =0AFrom: Big Gee =0ATo: zenith-list@matronic
s.com =0ASent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:14 AM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith-Lis
t: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away!=0A=0A=0ABob, my vote
is with Mark T. Do the wings first, hang them up out of the way, than do t
he fuselage. I don't know about Jon's video, I have never seen it. I am su
re he has some good points in it. I do know in the "old days" Chris said d
o the wings first as it was easier to build the fuselage to fit the wings,
than to try and build the wings to fit the fuselage. Good luck in what ev
er you decide.=0AFritz=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: "robert.
eli@adelphia.net" <robert.eli@adelphia.net>=0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.com
=0ASent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:58:48 AM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith-List:
For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away!=0A=0A=0A--> Zenith-List
message posted by: <robert.eli@adelphia.net>=0A=0AJon,=0A=0AThanks for the
advice. I had not thought about doing the fuselage next, just because I th
ought that the wings were the usual next step. I will strongly consider do
ing the fuselage next since I need all of the motivational help I can get.
On the "remove the slats and VG issue", Mark Townsend has convinced me to
build my CH701 Kit "per plans", with the slats. The only reason the "slat
removal and VG approach" seemed attractive was that I don't plan to push th
e envelop and "hang the plane on the prop" at high angles of attack at low
altitude because it is obviously the most risky position to be in if you ha
ve a engine-out. Thanks for the input and best wishes for the Holidays.=0A
=0ABob Eli=0A=0A=0A---- Jon Croke <Jon@joncroke.com> wrote: =0A> --> Zenith
-List message posted by: "Jon Croke" <Jon@joncroke.com>=0A> =0A> Hi Bob,=0A
> =0A> I am honored that you would ask my opinion about this, however I am
the =0A> LEAST qualified to express an opinion about this topic. I have no
formal =0A> aerodynamics education... and you may recall I am sometimes ch
allenged at =0A> keeping the plane in the air for more than a few hours!=0A
> =0A> If you have not built the fuselage yet, consider building that befor
e =0A> building the wings. Obviously they both (wings and fuse) have to be
=0A> completed before flying, but I have found it makes a lot more emotiona
l =0A> sense to have the body of the plane done and sitting there whilst yo
u embark =0A> on the wings. (Something to sit in, and hangar fly in aroun
d the yard, =0A> maybe even start the engine) I have done it both ways... b
uilding the fuse =0A> first is much more rewarding, in my opinion!=0A> =0A>
elphia.net>=0A> >=0A> > Hey Jon Croke,=0A> >=0A> > I've been reading about
all of this flight experience with the slats =0A> > removed and vortex gene
rators in their place. I'm finally finishing up =0A> > the tail and thinki
ng about the wings (yes, I know I'm as slow as you know =0A> > what). But,
I am actually thinking about building my wings minus the =0A> > slats. Si
nce you are on your third CH701, and obviously know the thing =0A> > inside
out, what is your take on this no-slats approach?=0A> >=0A> > Bob Eli=0A>
>=0A> > =0A> =0A> =0A&This Month = * AeroElectric ="http://www.home
builthelp.com/" target=_blank>www.homebuilthelp.com http://www.bsp;
-Matt Dralle, sp; - The Zenith-List Email .com/Navig
ator?Zenith-List" ===========0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AHave a bu
rning question? Go to Yahoo! Answers and get answers from real people who k
now. =0A=0A=0Ahref="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com=0Ah
ref="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com=0Ahref="http:/
/www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com=0Ahref="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www
.homebuilthelp.com=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://
www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">
http://www.matron=0A=0ADate: 12/7/2006=0A=0Aw="http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution" target=_blank rel=nofollow>hics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List"
target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.ma==========
===============0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AAny quest
ions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now. =0A=0A=0Ahref
="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com=0Ahref="http://www.
buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com=0Ahref="http://www.kitlog.com">w
ww.kitlog.com=0Ahref="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/
chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matron
=========================0A
===============0A=0A=0A =0A____________________
________________________________________________________________=0AHave a b
urning question? =0AGo to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real
people who know.
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: | Selling a complete 601XL Kit |
Due to lack of time to complete the project I am considering selling my
complete 601XL kit. Only the rudder and tail sections have been touched
the remaining kit is as delivered. The kit number is number 6-5346.
The kit is tricycle gear with landing lights and other options. $17,000
invested I am looking to sell for $12,500 or best offer. The kit is
located in the Memphis TN area and is available for pick up only. If
you are interested please contact me offline.
Brian Williamson
901-428-0510
Brian.williamson@acxiom.com
Do Not Archive
*************************************************************************
The information contained in this communication is confidential, is
intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be
legally privileged.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please resend this
communication to the sender and delete the original message or any copy
of it from your computer system.
Thank you.
*************************************************************************
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: Aiming a 601 Landing Light |
My plan is to aim the taxi light in the obvious way and then wander around the
airport and find a plane with a similar landing light arrangement and get the
owner to turn it on and see where it hits the ground then match that.
cmaggart(at)sprintmail.co wrote:
> The recent discussions about landing lights brings up a question from me. How
does one aim the landing light on a 601? Aiming the taxi light is pretty
obvious, but is there any way to aim the landing light other than trial and error?
>
> Chuck Maggart, 601XL/Jabiru
> painted and slowly moving to hangar
>
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81357#81357
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: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! |
Yes, people, including myself, got our $.02 in. That is what the list is for. If
you don't want folk's $.02 I would strongly reccomend that you don't post to
or read a public forum that is specificly designed to get a whole lot of people's
$.02 so the outcome will be worth more than $.02.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81359#81359
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: Aiming a 601 Landing Light |
I've been wondering how to aim the landing lights too. Perhaps some who
already have theirs properly aimed could tell us where theirs hit the
ground - and whether tri-gear or TG 601's or other model configurations..
Seems like a great way to get them in the ball park before flying in dim
light to make final adjusments.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@cox.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 3:17 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Aiming a 601 Landing Light
>
> My plan is to aim the taxi light in the obvious way and then wander around
> the airport and find a plane with a similar landing light arrangement and
> get the owner to turn it on and see where it hits the ground then match
> that.
>
>
> cmaggart(at)sprintmail.co wrote:
>> The recent discussions about landing lights brings up a question from
>> me. How does one aim the landing light on a 601? Aiming the taxi light
>> is pretty obvious, but is there any way to aim the landing light other
>> than trial and error?
>>
>> Chuck Maggart, 601XL/Jabiru
>> painted and slowly moving to hangar
>>
>
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81357#81357
>
>
>
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 |
|
On my 701 amphibian speed at 5500rpm in smooth air, no wind went from 85 to 95mph.
(GPS speeds) Part of the speed came from repitching the warp drive prop today(about
3mph). But cutting down drag by removing the slats made this possible.
I had done a fair amount of clean up on the 701 already and with the slats
on (with wheels)it would cruise 97mph at 5200 rpm.
The nice part is running 86 or so at about 400 rpm less than before. That's
what I'll be doing most of the time. Fly....life is short! Tom in Florida
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=81386#81386
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: | POH-computer stuff |
Guys,
Several of you have been talking about writing your Pilot's Operating
Handbook (POH). I write many user guides, booklets and fliers in my
business. I use a relatively inexpensive program called Clickbook, by Blue
Squirrel: http://www.bluesquirrel.com/products/clickbook/ . It installs a
special printer in Windows. When you print a document to it, a window pops
up. There you can select a variety of print formats. My favorite format
reduces the document page, rearranges the pages and prints two pages
side-by-side on a landscape paper on your regular printer. This allows you
to fold the paper in half and have an 8-1/2 inch tall by 5-1/2 inch wide
little booklet from a document written as an 8-1/2 by 11. I usually write my
documents at 14 point so when reduced it looks close to 12 point (the
document is reduced by about 2 points). The program also shows you how to
print on both sides of the page using a "one side per page" printer. Print a
cover using thick photo paper, fold the pages and staple and you have a very
professional looking booklet. It also won't take up a great deal of space in
the cockpit. I plan to use it for my engine and airframe maintenance
logbooks too.
You're building a beautiful aircraft; make your documentation look good too!
Dave Thompson
dave.thompson@verizon.net
Westminster, CA
601Xl rudder workshop, Corvair engine in parts and asking Santa for a set of
plans.
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: | POH-computer stuff |
>> Clickbook, by Blue Squirrel
FinePrint is a similar program. It will do true double-sided (duplex)
printing on a "side at a time" printer. It is also a printer driver:
www.fineprint.com/
-- Craig
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look away! |
Hi,
I disagree with you when you say =93It makes absolutely no logical sense
to
build the wings first.=94
Depending on model, it could make more sense to build wing first than
fuselage. The CH640 is an example. If you do fuselage before wings, it
could
be more difficult, if not feasible, due to restricted access when the
fuselage is completed, to fit wing spars to center fuselage spar.
Specially
if your project is from plan, you don=92t have any hole pre-drilled like
many
kit plane have.
But I agree with you, build fuselage before wings could be more fun=85
and
give perception plane more tangible. Depending on model and also
builder,
opinion and situation vary. The world is never white or black.
Christian Tremblay
A guy who build a CH640 aircraft from plan
http://www.zodiac640.com/
_____
De : owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] De la part de Big Gee
Envoy=E9 : Tuesday, December 12, 2006 11:04 PM
=C0 : zenith-list@matronics.com
Objet : Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look
away!
YOU GUYS DRIVE ME UP THE WALL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
----- Original Message ----
From: LRM <lrm@skyhawg.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:38:42 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look
away!
It makes absolutely no logical sense to build the wings first. However,
it
really doesn't matter which one you build first, if you follow the plans
all
parts will fit together. If Chris really said "do the wings first as it
was
easier to build the fuselage to fit the wings, than to try and build the
wings to fit the fuselage.", then there is a problem with his plans.
Jon's
rationale for building the fuselage first is simply a matter of self
encouragement. If you have a fuselage sitting there on landing gear so
you
can sit in it, roll it around, it gives you more incentive to keep
building.
The hard part is done. I built my fuselage first and my wings
(PegaStol)
bolted right up, zero problem. No matter what you build, you normally
build
the core first. Seems to me that one would want to build parts to fit
the
frame not the frame to fit the parts.
Just me 2 cents worth for what it's worth, Larry N1345L www.skyhawg.com
<http://www.skyhawg.com/>
---- Original Message -----
From: Big <mailto:taffy0687@yahoo.com> Gee
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look
away!
Bob, my vote is with Mark T. Do the wings first, hang them up out of
the
way, than do the fuselage. I don't know about Jon's video, I have never
seen
it. I am sure he has some good points in it. I do know in the "old
days"
Chris said do the wings first as it was easier to build the fuselage to
fit
the wings, than to try and build the wings to fit the fuselage. Good
luck
in what ever you decide.
Fritz
----- Original Message ----
From: "robert.eli@adelphia.net" <robert.eli@adelphia.net>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:58:48 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: For 701 builders ONLY - everyone else - look
away!
Jon,
Thanks for the advice. I had not thought about doing the fuselage next,
just because I thought that the wings were the usual next step. I will
strongly consider doing the fuselage next since I need all of the
motivational help I can get. On the "remove the slats and VG issue",
Mark
Townsend has convinced me to build my CH701 Kit "per plans", with the
slats.
The only reason the "slat removal and VG approach" seemed attractive was
that I don't plan to push the envelop and "hang the plane on the prop"
at
high angles of attack at low altitude because it is obviously the most
risky
position to be in if you have a engine-out. Thanks for the input and
best
wishes for the Holidays.
Bob Eli
---- Jon Croke <Jon@joncroke.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> I am honored that you would ask my opinion about this, however I am
the
> LEAST qualified to express an opinion about this topic. I have no
formal
> aerodynamics education... and you may recall I am sometimes challenged
at
> keeping the plane in the air for more than a few hours!
>
> If you have not built the fuselage yet, consider building that before
> building the wings. Obviously they both (wings and fuse) have to be
> completed before flying, but I have found it makes a lot more
emotional
> sense to have the body of the plane done and sitting there whilst you
embark
> on the wings. (Something to sit in, and hangar fly in around the
yard,
> maybe even start the engine) I have done it both ways... building the
fuse
> first is much more rewarding, in my opinion!
>
> Jon
>
>
>
> >
> > Hey Jon Croke,
> >
> > I've been reading about all of this flight experience with the slats
> > removed and vortex generators in their place. I'm finally finishing
up
> > the tail and thinking about the wings (yes, I know I'm as slow as
you
know
> > what). But, I am actually thinking about building my wings minus
the
> > slats. Since you are on your third CH701, and obviously know the
thing
> > inside out, what is your take on this no-slats approach?
> >
> > Bob Eli
> >
> >
>
>
&This Month = * AeroElectric = <http://www.aeroelectr;
%20*%20the%20builder's%20bookstore%20%3ca%20href=/>
"http://www.homebuilthelp.com/" target=_blank>www.homebuilthelp.com
http://www.bsp; -Matt Dralle, sp; - The
Zenith-List Email .com/Navigator?Zenith-List"
=========
<http://www.aeroelectr;
%20*%20the%20builder's%20bookstore%20%3ca%20href=/>
<http://www.aeroelectr;
%20*%20the%20builder's%20bookstore%20%3ca%20href=/>
<http://www.aeroelectr;
%20*%20the%20builder's%20bookstore%20%3ca%20href=/>
_____
Have a burning question? Go to <http://www.aeroelectr;
%20*%20the%20builder's%20bookstore%20%3ca%20href=/> Yahoo! Answers
<http://answers.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTFvbGNhMGE3BF9TAzM5NjU0NTEwOARfcwM
zOTY1
NDUxMDMEc2VjA21haWxfdGFnbGluZQRzbGsDbWFpbF90YWcx> and get answers from
real
people who know.
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matron
www.aeroelectric.com
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! --
|