---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 05/15/07: 49 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:58 AM - Re: just a consideration (jetboy) 2. 04:49 AM - Re: Wing Sweep (ashontz) 3. 05:01 AM - Re: just a consideration (BadBob) 4. 06:37 AM - Re: Dual Stick weight in 601 () 5. 06:46 AM - Re: Fw: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 (David Mikesell) 6. 07:07 AM - Re: Rolled bead for fuel tank (maarten versteeg) 7. 07:18 AM - Re: Dual Stick weight in 601 (Ronald Steele) 8. 07:34 AM - Aileron stop 6W10-4 (Bill Sewell) 9. 08:08 AM - Re: Aileron stop 6W10-4 (Craig Payne) 10. 08:10 AM - What a useful tool!!! (Jeff Small) 11. 08:17 AM - flying over gross (john butterfield) 12. 08:42 AM - Re: Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks (Michael Valentine) 13. 09:31 AM - Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks (Tim Juhl) 14. 09:34 AM - Re: Aileron stop 6W10-4 () 15. 09:39 AM - remove from list (john) 16. 09:49 AM - Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks (dgardea(at)gmail.com) 17. 09:52 AM - Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks (PatrickW) 18. 09:57 AM - Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks (dgardea(at)gmail.com) 19. 10:09 AM - Re: flying over gross () 20. 10:19 AM - Re: Fuel system contamination (ashontz) 21. 10:20 AM - Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks (Tim Juhl) 22. 10:35 AM - Re: 701 wing strut (billmileski) 23. 10:58 AM - Re: remove from list (Bill Steer) 24. 11:22 AM - 701 for sale () 25. 12:20 PM - Re: 601 load tests (PatrickW) 26. 12:30 PM - Flutter Analysis Software (ashontz) 27. 12:43 PM - Re: Flutter Analysis Software (ashontz) 28. 03:30 PM - Dynon installation (Bill Naumuk) 29. 03:41 PM - Re: Re: Harbor Freight Products (Stanley Challgren) 30. 03:52 PM - Re: Dynon installation (Jaybannist@cs.com) 31. 04:38 PM - Re: Dynon installation () 32. 05:10 PM - Re: Fw: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 (Kurt A. Schumacher) 33. 06:30 PM - Re: Rolled bead for fuel tank (Ron Lendon) 34. 06:44 PM - Re: Fw: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 (Bryan Martin) 35. 07:04 PM - Re: Re: Harbor Freight Products (Bill Naumuk) 36. 07:06 PM - Re: Dynon installation (Bill Naumuk) 37. 07:07 PM - Re: Fw: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 (David Mikesell) 38. 07:12 PM - Re: Dynon installation (RURUNY@aol.com) 39. 07:33 PM - Re: Dynon installation (Craig Payne) 40. 07:47 PM - Re: Dynon installation (Craig Payne) 41. 07:48 PM - Re: Re: Harbor Freight Products (Graeme) 42. 07:49 PM - Re: Fw: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 (Paul Mulwitz) 43. 08:11 PM - Re: Re: Harbor Freight Products (Terry Turnquist) 44. 08:11 PM - Fuel Line Length between Wing Tank and Selector Valve? (PatrickW) 45. 09:06 PM - Re: Dynon installation (Gary Boothe) 46. 10:12 PM - Re: Fw: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 (JohnDRead@aol.com) 47. 10:14 PM - Re: Aileron stop 6W10-4 (JohnDRead@aol.com) 48. 10:21 PM - Re: Re: 701 wing strut (JohnDRead@aol.com) 49. 11:17 PM - Re: Aileron stop 6W10-4 (Craig Payne) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:58:46 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: just a consideration From: "jetboy" Fastback Cessna 150s don't have balance in the tails either, 150 series thru 150C model. Also, the 601 rudder, being similar to my 701, is at least partly aerodynamically and possibly mass balanced due to the position of the hinge axis? I dont see any issues there. I did sit up and take notice of the 'washboarding' wing vibrations reported on this forum a few months back to an XL, dismissed at the time as being likely caused by heat efflux from a powerplant below. Ralph -------- Ralph - CH701 / 2200a Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112896#112896 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:49:10 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Wing Sweep From: "ashontz" I'm well aware of the differences. I also have a 601XL wing sitting on my workbench and as careful as I've been constructing it, I'm not happy with the oil-canning potential of the widely spaced ribs. Neither the RV or the Grumman have a large hole on the top of the wing (baggage compartment) in one of the most critical areas of the wing. The additional support I believe the wing would benefit from (top spar cap angle extrusion and 5 additional ribs) would only add about 10 pounds to each wing. Hardly a difference in weight that would require a jet engine to get it off the ground. Take away the wing locker and whatever additional weight in hiking boots and toothbrushes to be transported would more than make up for it. bryanmmartin wrote: > Most RV's are 200 mph airplanes that weigh over 1600 lbs and can take a > 180 hp engine. The Grumman Traveler is a four place 150 mph airplane > with a gross weight of 2200 lbs and an O-320 engine. Do you think that > might explain why they have more wing ribs than a 1320 lb, 130 mph > airplane designed to handle no more than 130 hp? > > As far as wing sweep is concerned, take a good look at a Cessna Skyhawk. > Notice the straight leading edge and the tapered trailing edge? Would > anyone call the Cessna wing a forward swept wing? Many aircraft have > been built over the years with a similar planform and none of them are > considered forward swept wings. From a practical standpoint, a wing is > not considered swept unless both the leading edge and the mean chord > line are swept back or forward. Even if there is a small amount of sweep > to the CH601XL wing, it isn't enough to have a significant effect in the > flight envelope the plane operates in. The aerodynamic problems > associated with forward swept wings only show up when there is a > substantial amount of sweep and, usually, speeds well beyond the safe > limits of the CH601. > > We're not building F-15s here, we're building lightweight sport > airplanes. I could build an airplane that would never break up under any > conceivable flight conditions, you could fly it through thunder storms, > hurricanes and even tornadoes. The only problem is, it would be so > damned heavy, you would need a GE-90 to get the thing off the ground. > > > > > > > > When the plane is level (which means the wings are level), the wings are in fact swept forward. If there was no dyhedral (even with the inclined spar), the wings regardless of whether it was tilted back or forward 9 degrees would would have no sweep. It's the dihedral in conjunction with the inclined main spar that causes a slight sweep forward when the plane is level. > > > > At what angle of attack does the plane fly at at cruise speed? 9 degrees. In that case, the wings would have no sweep while in flight. > > > > Even so, I don't think the sweep is too much of a problem no that I think about it. I think the bigger issue is that personally, now that I think about it and compare the XL to other planes, it doesn't have enough ribs in the wing. A RV has ribs every 9 inches, even a Grumman Traveler has them every 15 inches where as the XL has them at 21+ inches. Push on the skin on either of those wings and they feel solid where as the XL feels a little anemic. A fellow builder has remarked that a lot of guys go ahead and put false ribs in the eliminate oil-canning in the wings because there's just such a large space between ribs that it's almost a give you're going to get some oil-canning, particularly on the lower skin. I think thats a major indication that it doesn't just need false ribs, but actual ribs in those locations. It's showing an inherent weakness in those areas. Slightly oil-canning or depression when pushed by hand is much more significant distortion under flight loads. A > > n ! > > > > > > oil can effect just with hand pressure probably distorts the wing by half a millimeter. In flight conditions that could have up to a lot more shifting of the structure. I think extra ribs in there would be a good idea. The strength of the wing is reliant on the ability of the skins to distribute the force. Allow that skin to move too much and you have problems. Not enough ribs is as bad as oversized sloppy wholes on a plane that has enough ribs. > > > > > > > > > > -- > Bryan Martin > Zenith 601XL N61BM > Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive > Do Not Archive -------- Andy Shontz CH601XL - Corvair www.mykitlog.com/ashontz Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112902#112902 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:01:34 AM PST US From: "BadBob" Subject: Zenith-List: Re: just a consideration I have had my Cassutt to WELL over 200 knots in a dive. Neither the rudder or elevator is balanced. Do not archive. Bob Johnson badbob0007@earthlink.net ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:37:34 AM PST US From: Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Dual Stick weight in 601 Oh THAT WEIGHT! I thought the question was about the feel of resistance to movement. My bad. Dred Do Not Archive Do Not Listen to Idiots Like Me ---- Craig Payne wrote: > > > Does anyone know the difference in weight going with the dual stick option > v.s. the single stick? > > 7.1 vs. 2.7 pounds for a difference of 4.4 > > For the Y I weighed three parts: the torque tube, the Y stick and the rear > support bearing 6B17-3. > > For the dual sticks I weighed the torque tube, support bearing, the two > sticks, the control connection tube, the threaded rods, the three aluminum > plates, the rod ends, the extruded L's and the hardware. > > -- Craig ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:46:43 AM PST US From: "David Mikesell" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 Hmmm lets see no where did it say Standard or Utility and I have to agree if you look at the website, promo material two different ratings. NO not like a 150 both the same plane, same weights, same performance but two different negative g ratings. I hope just a typing error by the webmaster. David Mikesell 23597 N. Hwy 99 Acampo, CA 95220 209-224-4485 skyguynca@skyguynca.com www.skyguynca.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Martin" Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 9:01 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 > > Two separate claims for two separate standards of airworthiness. What's so > odd about that? One's an Experimental Amateur Built and one has to meet > the consensus standards under Special LSA. Even a Cessna 150 has two > different load factors depending on which category you are operating it > under, Normal or Utility. > >> >> So now we have two seperate claims from CH about load factor? One stating >> +6/-3 and another at +6/-6? Hhhhmmm. I doubt even the +6. >> >> [quote="planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co"]came through white last time... >> do not archive >> David Downey wrote: [quote]Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 08:16:03 -0700 (PDT) >> From: David Downey Subject: Re: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 >> To: zenith-list@matronics.com >> >> 601XL SN 6406 3-15-06 Ed 3 Rev 3 sheet 6-X-1 says: >> "Design Load Factor (Ultimate): +/- 6 G @1320 lbs" >> do not archive >> Gig Giacona wrote: >> the cover page of my set of 601XL plans S# 4959. >> >> "Design Load >>> [b] >> > > -- > Bryan Martin > Zenith 601XL N61BM > Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive > Do Not Archive > > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:07:49 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Rolled bead for fuel tank From: "maarten versteeg" Hello, Yesterday evening I made the simple bead block press to create the bead on the fuel tanks. The result is pretty good, but it requires a lot of pressure with my vice on the .032 Al, also you have to do it in steps to keep the bead nice and smooth. If I want to continue this I will also have to make a smaller block that allows me to follow the curves of the fuel tank. The attached images show the the little oak bead press block that I made and two images of results on a bending test strip that I worked on to test the location for the fuel tank bending. I'll continue working on this an report my results. Regards, Maarten -------- Maarten Versteeg 601XL scratch building wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112931#112931 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/bead_result_2_194.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/bead_result_1_924.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/bead_block_186.jpg ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:18:23 AM PST US From: Ronald Steele Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Dual Stick weight in 601 Well, I was interested in weight wrt Gross Weight, but both pieces info are useful. Thanks for the responses. Ron On May 15, 2007, at 9:36 AM, wrote: > > Oh THAT WEIGHT! I thought the question was about the feel of > resistance to movement. My bad. > > Dred > Do Not Archive > > Do Not Listen to Idiots Like Me > > ---- Craig Payne wrote: >> >> >>> Does anyone know the difference in weight going with the dual >>> stick option >> v.s. the single stick? >> >> 7.1 vs. 2.7 pounds for a difference of 4.4 >> >> For the Y I weighed three parts: the torque tube, the Y stick and >> the rear >> support bearing 6B17-3. >> >> For the dual sticks I weighed the torque tube, support bearing, >> the two >> sticks, the control connection tube, the threaded rods, the three >> aluminum >> plates, the rod ends, the extruded L's and the hardware. >> >> -- Craig > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:34:40 AM PST US From: "Bill Sewell" Subject: Zenith-List: Aileron stop 6W10-4 My 2003 601xl wing kit came with a different type of aileron stop than that which is now being used. I have just installed the ailerons on the wings and would like to change the stops to the new design. I have pictures of the new design from the aircraft at the Zenith booth at Sun-n-Fun last month. I also have the pictures in the latest revision (06/24/05) photo assembly guide. Could someone provide me with the overall dimensions, bend locations and material thickness for this part. Also, is it riveted at both the top and bottom or just the top? Thanks, Bill Sewell N601BZ ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:08:46 AM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Aileron stop 6W10-4 A scan of section 6W10 from the March '06 plans is attached. The length (meaning width?) is given as 60, the developed length as 77. The material is .040. The 4 sections are 15, 29, 15 and 20mm long. -- Craig ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:10:01 AM PST US From: "Jeff Small" Subject: Zenith-List: What a useful tool!!! Dred, +++Thanks for the laugh and the excellent suggestion. I think that "do not archive" is never used enough when the bull begins to fly, but this phrasing "Do Not Listen to Idiots Like Me" should be part of the standard signature of many of the modern era listers. Most of the rest of us, frequent posters or just lurkers, readily see the failings in reasoning (add MORE ribs!!!) of the "experts." If an opinion is constantly hammered by the opinionated, then it's their prerogative, only it reeks of desperation and illustrates that they hope to accept their own views by repeating them so often. To the others who are building: stay away from spending too much time with the trivialities of this list. Sooner or later you will leave the earthbound view of every day and see the world from aloft in a creation of your own hands. About four minutes into your first flight, after the adrenalin comes down and your focus can expand a bit, you will be awash in a feeling that only a few have experienced. You have given yourself wings. Do Not Listen to Idiots Like Me jeff ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 08:17:20 AM PST US From: john butterfield Subject: Zenith-List: flying over gross hi list not sure about the wing design, but have been wondering about the real effect of flying "over" the max gross weight. i know we set the max ourselves, but what is the real effect on the aircraft if you fly over weight within the cg limits. i know many people add a little weight when they fly. it seems to me that since we set our own limits, what is the ralationship between g forces and weight conditions. likely, you will lose some performance and reductions of you max g limits, but as far as strength goes, if you fly at 1 g, it should not be a problem. i am sure my question is improperly stated, but what really happens if your machine is very heavy. john butterfield 601XL, corvair torrance, ca Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/ ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:42:33 AM PST US From: "Michael Valentine" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks Patrick - I did not have the most recent designs on this one. My spar was built for 12 gallon tanks with 4 nose ribs inboard of the tank, two just outboard, another space for a 12 gallon tank, then three more ribs outboard of the second space. When I spoke with the factory about changing the spar to accomodate the longer 15 gallon tank, they said I should put 2 nose ribs outboard of the tank. There was already a hat stiffener in that location - easy to install two ribs right there. Michael in NH do not archive On 5/14/07, PatrickW wrote: > > > > Michael Valentine wrote: > > I also added 2 ribs where the hat stiffener is - around 1700mm - at the > end of the tank. I think this is required if you go this route. > > > Where did you find that information...? > > I'm just now finishing one wing, and don't recall seeing any requirement > for 2 more ribs. I *think* I have the most recent drawings. > > I'd sure hate to button this thing up missing a couple of wing ribs... > > Thanks, > > Patrick > 601XL/Corvair > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112869#112869 > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:31:11 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks From: "Tim Juhl" When you install the 15 gallon tanks you move the rib from the position of the L that you cut off to another flange outboard of the tank. You still have 7 Nose Ribs - 3 inbd of the tank and 4 outboard. See pix. Tim -------- DO NOT ARCHIVE ______________ CFII Champ L16A flying Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A Working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112954#112954 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/noseribs2_212.jpg ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 09:34:12 AM PST US From: Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Aileron stop 6W10-4 The drawing also answers the question about riveting the piece. It is riveted with the line of bottom rear skin to the flange rear spar channel and also to the web of the rear spar channel. Dred ---- Craig Payne wrote: > A scan of section 6W10 from the March '06 plans is attached. The length > (meaning width?) is given as 60, the developed length as 77. The material is > .040. The 4 sections are 15, 29, 15 and 20mm long. > > -- Craig ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 09:39:53 AM PST US From: "john" Subject: Zenith-List: remove from list please remove me from list jcl64@scccinternet.com thanks john ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 09:49:18 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks From: "dgardea(at)gmail.com" Tim, So I will need to add a new nose rib "L" for the relocated nose rib #4? Thanks for the pic. What is the new position for the relocated nose rib #4? I could not find any reference to this in plans or assy docs, i.e., modifications of the spar/nose rib attachment points to support the long range tanks. (Maybe I did not look hard enough) Thanks, Dave -------- Dave Gardea 601XL - Corvair working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112959#112959 ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 09:52:28 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks From: "PatrickW" Tim Juhl wrote: > See pix.Tim Gotcha. Thanks. I'm ok. It sure is nice to have this forum to correspond with others who are doing the same thing. Patrick 601XL/Corvair Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112960#112960 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 09:57:16 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks From: "dgardea(at)gmail.com" Pls disregard the last post .. I found the location, just the other side of the hat stiffener, on the drawing at 1750 from the spar root for the relocated nose rib #4 to support the long range tank. Thanks for the help again, guys. Dave Gardea do not archive -------- Dave Gardea 601XL - Corvair working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112961#112961 ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 10:09:35 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: flying over gross Seems like straightforward physics to me. 1G means one gravitational acceleration force on the weight (mass) of the plane. If that weight is 1200 pounds the wings are supporting 1200 pounds at 1G. If it's 200 pounds heavier, the wings support 1400 pounds at 1G. Now at 3Gs the first plane's wings are supporting 3600 pounds and the secong one is supporting 4200 pounds. The difference in load on the wings is 200 pounds at 1G but 600 pounds at 3Gs. When you talk about flying at 1G, I expect you realize that you can't actually do that for an entire flight.... you are constantly accelerating and decelerating in various directions the whole time. Therefore the question is irrelevant. The average Summer day around SW Louisiana includes a lot of 2.5 to 3G turbulence even if I don't accelerate the plane at all. Bottom line is go with what the designer established to allow you a margin of safety. Dred Do Not Archive Do Not Second Guess the Designer ---- john butterfield wrote: > > hi list > not sure about the wing design, but have been > wondering about the real effect of flying "over" the > max gross weight. i know we set the max ourselves, > but what is the real effect on the aircraft if you fly > over weight within the cg limits. i know many people > add a little weight when they fly. it seems to me > that since we set our own limits, what is the > ralationship between g forces and weight conditions. > likely, you will lose some performance and reductions > of you max g limits, but as far as strength goes, if > you fly at 1 g, it should not be a problem. > > i am sure my question is improperly stated, but what > really happens if your machine is very heavy. > john butterfield > 601XL, corvair > torrance, ca ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 10:19:28 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Fuel system contamination From: "ashontz" I agree, it sounds like 2-cycle oil, actually, it almost sounds like regualr motor oil used as 2-cycle oil, (you can do that but it smokes like hell). My boat has had the same black fuel lines for 11 years (yes, I shoud replace them), even so, I've never seen anything like that in my fuel/water seperator even after mixing stabilizer in the tanks and letting it sit over the winter. larry(at)macsmachine.com wrote: > It nearly sounds like the guy tried to use the same can for his plane > and a 2-cycle lawn mower. Aside from that, perhaps he put > an additive in thinking it would mix and stabilize his fuel over > winter. If he used a bad float, it may have gone south too. I'd at the > least > get a flashlight and a mirror in the tank after emptying it and have a > good look inside. > > Larry McFarland at www.macsmachine.com > do not archive > > robert stone wrote: > > > Members, > > I have not had my ZodiacXL for very long and was unaware of the > > center fuel drain until a friend pointed it out to me. When I opened > > the valve nothing but black materiel came out eventually turning green > > then finally blue. I have no idea what this materiel was but I > > suspect auto fuel. I did not build this aircraft but got it from a > > man in Ringwood, Oklahoma and I suspect he used auto fuel to fly the > > 40 hours off. Have any of you Zodiac601XL builders had an experence > > like this and what action did you take. > > > > Tracy Stone DO NOT ARCHIVE > > Zodiac601XL > > Harker Heights, Tx > > *========================== > > > > * > > > > > -------- Andy Shontz CH601XL - Corvair www.mykitlog.com/ashontz Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112965#112965 ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 10:20:25 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL outboard spar and long range tanks From: "Tim Juhl" For what it is worth - I had to add additional cork to the ends of the fuel tank to get a snug fit using the ZAC rib locations. IMPORTANT - Fitting the tank is difficult with both the #3 & 4 ribs riveted in place. In my case I didn't rivet NR4 until the tank was installed because my capacitance type fuel sender was installed on that end. If you used the standard float type you might want to hold off on riveting NR 3 until everything is fitted and the tank installed. I also had to build up some cork around the filler hole (about 5/16") to make a snug fit without pushing the skin down around the neck. See pix. If your filler neck turns in with any difficulty at all you might want to get on the list for the "big tap" loaned out by ZAC. On one of my tanks when I hand screwed the neck in and left it for a couple of days I couldn't get it back out. The threads crossed and locked and I had to destroy the neck to remove it. If you want more info do a search of Fuel Filler Neck Woes. Tim -------- DO NOT ARCHIVE ______________ CFII Champ L16A flying Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A Working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112966#112966 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/fillhole_206.jpg ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 10:35:45 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 701 wing strut From: "billmileski" I have one piece struts, and interestingly, from the factory, one fit perfectly, and the other needed a four degree twist. I jigged it and carefully heated and twisted the 4130 tube about a foot from the end and it worked out well. I actually have one of the newer two-piece struts for the 701, as received from Zenith (still wrapped), if anyone is interested. Bill Mileski Ledyard, CT 701/912S/90hrs Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112969#112969 ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 10:58:29 AM PST US From: Bill Steer Subject: Re: Zenith-List: remove from list You'll have to do that yourself, John, by going to the Matronics site and following the directions there. Bill Do not archive john wrote: > please remove me from list jcl64@scccinternet.com > thanks john > * > * ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 11:22:38 AM PST US From: Subject: Zenith-List: 701 for sale Just listed on Barnstormers under kit planes. ZENITH 701 STOL . $21,000 . FOR SALE . Purchased as kit assembled ready for engine/firewall forward. Wings not attached. Will give an EA81 engine (not rebuilt or in working order). Have pictures as it was being assembled and plans. Always stored in a garage or hanger. Call or email with questions. Marana is close to Tucson. . Contact Gayla A. Lemey - located Marana, AZ USA . Telephone: 520-481-9252 . Posted May 15, 2007 . Show all Ads posted by this Advertiser . Recommend This Ad to a Friend . Email Advertiser . Report This Ad ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 12:20:46 PM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601 load tests From: "PatrickW" Hey guys - for what it's worth, these recent discussions sound a lot like what went on on one of the RV forums a while back. Here's a thread from an RV site discussing the losses of two RV's. One was an early RV-3, and the other was the RV-8 demo plane which was lost due to wings folding: http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=10593&page=1&pp=10 Here is a Service Bulletin on the RV-3 wing failures: http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/sb96-03-1.pdf Patrick 601XL/Corvair Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112990#112990 ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 12:30:40 PM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Flutter Analysis Software From: "ashontz" http://www.aircraftdesigns.com/books.html MODERN AERODYNAMIC FLUTTER ANALYSIS by Martin Hollmann. Aircraft flutter is still one of those problems that takes the lives of a number of aviators every year. Today, with the power of personal computers, PCs, and the use of a powerful and accurate computer program as outlined in the MODERN AERODYNAMIC FLUTTER ANALYSIS, flutter can be accurately predicted on an aircraft before it is flown. This book is the only book which covers the history of flutter analysis up to the present time. The flutter phenomena is explained in layman terms and the process of predicting flutter using a program called Subsonic Flutter Analysis, SAF, is explained. MODERN AERODYNAMIC FLUTTER ANALYSIS describes the analysis sequence starting with determining mode shapes and eigen values from a finite element analysis, ground vibration survey test, flutter analysis using a doublet-lattice method and, finally, a sensitivity study. Several examples are presented including the wing of the Lancair IV, the Wheeler Express, a sailplane wing, a jet fighter and the Stallion. Although the theory of the doublet-lattice procedure, modal interpolation, generalized aerodynamic force interpolation and vibration analysis is reviewed, the actual application of solving flutter problems is emphasized. Finally, the Federal Aviation Administration's compliance to flutter prevention is presented. This book and software program is an absolute must for anyone designing a high performance aircraft or for students interested in modern methods of solving flutter problems. Book: SALE PRICE $39.90. Software program disk and key: The compiled Subsonic Flutter Analysis program for Windows 95/98/2000. This is one of the best programs for flutter analysis. It is used through out the aerospace industry. SALE PRICE $998.00 -------- Andy Shontz CH601XL - Corvair www.mykitlog.com/ashontz Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112993#112993 ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 12:43:28 PM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Flutter Analysis Software From: "ashontz" http://www.geocities.com/mgd3/flying/flutter -------- Andy Shontz CH601XL - Corvair www.mykitlog.com/ashontz Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=112996#112996 ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 03:30:46 PM PST US From: "Bill Naumuk" Subject: Zenith-List: Dynon installation All- Many thanks to Larry Mac for measuring the space between his panel and firewall for me. Recent posts on numerous lists have insinuated that there wasn't enough room to mount a Dynon in a Zenith with a header tank. Using Larry's numbers, worst case scenario is I have 5-3/8" to work with. According to the Dynon website, a D-100 EFIS is 4.51" deep. Should be doable. Thoughts? Excuse me, from Dynon owners, not speculators. Bill Naumuk HDS Fuse/Corvair Townville, Pa ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 03:41:55 PM PST US From: Stanley Challgren Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Dred & Dave: OK, I will start over and dump out the oil I added as per the instruction manual. The few drops before each day's use is what I had been doing with the other rivet pullers I have. Guess I should know better than to start reading instructions after 70 + years. Thanks, Stan On Apr 12, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Edward Moody II wrote: > In my Harbor Freight puller, I only had trouble when I was putting > oil in only periodically. After a year and a half of that practice, > it would not reset after each rivet pulled. Once I began to put two > - three drops at each work session, it has never given any more > problems. > > Dred > ----- Original Message ----- > From: TxDave > To: zenith-list@matronics.com > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:48 AM > Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products > > > Hey Stan, > > I have the same pneumatic riveter. You don't need to "prime" it. > You only have to put 1 or 2 drops of oil in the inlet periodically > to keep the moving parts lubricated. I have pulled thousands of > rivets with mine without a hiccup. Sounds like you may have used > too much oil. My apologies if I assumed incorrectly. > > ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 03:52:12 PM PST US From: Jaybannist@cs.com Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Dynon installation Bill, My Dynon EMS-D10 is only 4 1/2" deep; but when you attach the 37-pin D-sub connector and room to curl the wiring, it requires around 10". Jay in Dallas "Bill Naumuk" wrote: >All- > Many thanks to Larry Mac for measuring the space between his panel and firewall for me. > Recent posts on numerous lists have insinuated that there wasn't enough room to mount a Dynon in a Zenith with a header tank. Using Larry's numbers, worst case scenario is I have 5-3/8" to work with. According to the Dynon website, a D-100 EFIS is 4.51" deep. Should be doable. > Thoughts? Excuse me, from Dynon owners, not speculators. >Bill Naumuk >HDS Fuse/Corvair >Townville, Pa > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 04:38:39 PM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Dynon installation With my ASF units the chasis depth is only part of the equation. I am advised by the website info that the unit is 5.5" in depth plus connectors. They do not estimate the depth of the plug and the radius of wire that exits the plug (in a forward direction). My guess is that will take about 3 additional inches. Check Dynon's website or call their customer support before making any concrete plans. Dred Do Not archive ---- Bill Naumuk wrote: > All- > Many thanks to Larry Mac for measuring the space between his panel and firewall for me. > Recent posts on numerous lists have insinuated that there wasn't enough room to mount a Dynon in a Zenith with a header tank. Using Larry's numbers, worst case scenario is I have 5-3/8" to work with. According to the Dynon website, a D-100 EFIS is 4.51" deep. Should be doable. > Thoughts? Excuse me, from Dynon owners, not speculators. > Bill Naumuk > HDS Fuse/Corvair > Townville, Pa ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 05:10:55 PM PST US From: "Kurt A. Schumacher" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 Ha, here is one more - the European distributor http://www.zenair.be/?PG=2 claims for the "normal" 601 XL (not the re-Europeanized 601 XL ULM variant as shown under http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/xl-ulm.html without technical data): PERFORMANCE CH601 XL w / ROTAX 912S TOP SPEED 148 MPH 238 km/h CRUISE (75%) 138 MPH 222 km/h STALL SPEED V FE (with flaps) 38 MPH 60 km/h STALL SPEED (no flaps) 48 MPH 78 km/h RATE OF CLIMB 1200 FPM 4,8 m/sec TAKE-OFF ROLL 500 Feet 152 m LANDING DISTANCE 500 Feet 152 m RANGE (std., no reserve) 600 s. m 960 km ENDURANCE (no reserve) 4,5 h NEVER EXCEED SPEED (VNE) 180 MPH 290 km/h LOAD FACTOR (G) + 4 / - 2 g This leads back to the realistic assumption (unless confirmed by the factory) +6/-4 ultimate and +4/-2 limit is realistic. At least - these are the numbers CZAW had published in better times. -Kurt. -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Mikesell Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 3:45 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 Hmmm lets see no where did it say Standard or Utility and I have to agree if you look at the website, promo material two different ratings. NO not like a 150 both the same plane, same weights, same performance but two different negative g ratings. I hope just a typing error by the webmaster. David Mikesell 23597 N. Hwy 99 Acampo, CA 95220 209-224-4485 skyguynca@skyguynca.com www.skyguynca.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Martin" Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 9:01 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 > > Two separate claims for two separate standards of airworthiness. What's so > odd about that? One's an Experimental Amateur Built and one has to meet > the consensus standards under Special LSA. Even a Cessna 150 has two > different load factors depending on which category you are operating it > under, Normal or Utility. > >> >> So now we have two seperate claims from CH about load factor? One stating >> +6/-3 and another at +6/-6? Hhhhmmm. I doubt even the +6. >> >> [quote="planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co"]came through white last time... >> do not archive >> David Downey wrote: [quote]Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 08:16:03 -0700 (PDT) >> From: David Downey Subject: Re: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 >> To: zenith-list@matronics.com >> >> 601XL SN 6406 3-15-06 Ed 3 Rev 3 sheet 6-X-1 says: >> "Design Load Factor (Ultimate): +/- 6 G @1320 lbs" >> do not archive >> Gig Giacona wrote: >> the cover page of my set of 601XL plans S# 4959. >> >> "Design Load >>> [b] >> > > -- > Bryan Martin > Zenith 601XL N61BM > Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive > Do Not Archive > > > > > ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 06:30:45 PM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Rolled bead for fuel tank From: "Ron Lendon" Here are some pictures of the setup used for putting the beads in the tanks. One pass gets the depth and just used a mark on the closure screw and counted turns to get the same depth each time. I clamped a (1" x 3" x 7" steel block), near the die end to keep things inline. Also polished the tools to get a better surface finish, no marks on the sheet metal. Kitlog entry here: -------- Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI Corvair Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-) http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113047#113047 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/100_1138_137.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/100_1141_884.jpg ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 06:44:48 PM PST US From: Bryan Martin Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 They are not the same airplane, technically speaking. The +6 -3 G rated plane is factory built by AMD in Georgia to meet the consensus standards for S-LSA. The +6 -6 G rated plane is a homebuilt kit from Zenith Aircraft in Missouri for Experimental Amateur Built. Two separate airplanes built by two separate companies to two separate airwortiness standards. Even if they are nearly identical in all other respects. The consensus standards may have different guidelines for load ratings than the homebuilt industry which may account for the difference. The G ratings for the homebuilt version are probably based entirely on the structural strength of the airframe and other components. The reduced negative G rating for the S-LSA may be based on other considerations as well. There are no set rules for homebuilt like there are for S-LSA. Perhaps it takes into consideration the fuel system limitations for instance. I don't know, I haven't studied the standards. But I would not be surprised if the difference in load ratings is purely a technicality of the S-LSA standards. The Zodiac kits sold in Europe have to be certificated under European rules which are also more restrictive than the American E-AB rules, which probably accounts for the difference in load ratings there. I never implied that the difference was because one was utility and one was standard since those terms in no way apply to either the S-LSA or the E-AB airworthiness certificates, I merely used the C-150 as an example of how aircraft specifications can differ for the same type aircraft based on the certification standards it was being operated under. David Mikesell wrote: > > > Hmmm lets see no where did it say Standard or Utility and I have to > agree if you look at the website, promo material two different ratings. > NO not like a 150 both the same plane, same weights, same performance > but two different negative g ratings. I hope just a typing error by the > webmaster. > > David Mikesell > >> >> >> Two separate claims for two separate standards of airworthiness. >> What's so odd about that?.... >> >>> >>> So now we have two seperate claims from CH about load factor? One >>> stating +6/-3 and another at +6/-6? Hhhhmmm. I doubt even the +6. >>> >>> >> -- Bryan Martin Zenith 601XL N61BM Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive Do Not Archive ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 07:04:56 PM PST US From: "Bill Naumuk" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products All- I recently had problems with my HF puller- had nothing to do with lube, but with nosepieces working themselves loose. I put a couple of drops of oil in the inlet every time I used the puller, and when I had to tear it apart to find the real reason it wasn't working, oil just gushed out. I don't think oiling every time you pull hurts anything, but I don't think that's the cause of the problem. In my case, I KNOW it wasn't the cause. Bill Naumuk HDS Fuse/Corvair Townville, Pa ----- Original Message ----- From: Stanley Challgren To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:41 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Dred & Dave: OK, I will start over and dump out the oil I added as per the instruction manual. The few drops before each day's use is what I had been doing with the other rivet pullers I have. Guess I should know better than to start reading instructions after 70+ years. Thanks, Stan On Apr 12, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Edward Moody II wrote: In my Harbor Freight puller, I only had trouble when I was putting oil in only periodically. After a year and a half of that practice, it would not reset after each rivet pulled. Once I began to put two - three drops at each work session, it has never given any more problems. Dred ----- Original Message ----- From: TxDave To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:48 AM Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Hey Stan, I have the same pneumatic riveter. You don't need to "prime" it. You only have to put 1 or 2 drops of oil in the inlet periodically to keep the moving parts lubricated. I have pulled thousands of rivets with mine without a hiccup. Sounds like you may have used too much oil. My apologies if I assumed incorrectly. ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 07:06:57 PM PST US From: "Bill Naumuk" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Dynon installation 5-1/2" for the connector and wiring?? Wow, am I screwed! Bill Naumuk HDS Fuse/Corvair Townville, Pa ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 6:51 PM Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Dynon installation > > Bill, > > My Dynon EMS-D10 is only 4 1/2" deep; but when you attach the 37-pin D-sub > connector and room to curl the wiring, it requires around 10". > > Jay in Dallas > > > "Bill Naumuk" wrote: > >>All- >> Many thanks to Larry Mac for measuring the space between his panel and >> firewall for me. >> Recent posts on numerous lists have insinuated that there wasn't >> enough room to mount a Dynon in a Zenith with a header tank. Using >> Larry's numbers, worst case scenario is I have 5-3/8" to work with. >> According to the Dynon website, a D-100 EFIS is 4.51" deep. Should be >> doable. >> Thoughts? Excuse me, from Dynon owners, not speculators. >>Bill Naumuk >>HDS Fuse/Corvair >>Townville, Pa >> > > > ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 07:07:52 PM PST US From: "David Mikesell" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 I have read as many people have the ATSM standards for LSA and no where would it say to lower or recalculate it lower. I really don't see what point you are trying to make. The XL is a XL no matter who builds it. They are built from the same materials and plans to the standard set by the designer CH. David Mikesell 23597 N. Hwy 99 Acampo, CA 95220 209-224-4485 skyguynca@skyguynca.com www.skyguynca.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Martin" Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 6:44 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 > > They are not the same airplane, technically speaking. The +6 -3 G rated > plane is factory built by AMD in Georgia to meet the consensus standards > for S-LSA. The +6 -6 G rated plane is a homebuilt kit from Zenith Aircraft > in Missouri for Experimental Amateur Built. Two separate airplanes built > by two separate companies to two separate airwortiness standards. Even if > they are nearly identical in all other respects. > > The consensus standards may have different guidelines for load ratings > than the homebuilt industry which may account for the difference. The G > ratings for the homebuilt version are probably based entirely on the > structural strength of the airframe and other components. The reduced > negative G rating for the S-LSA may be based on other considerations as > well. There are no set rules for homebuilt like there are for S-LSA. > Perhaps it takes into consideration the fuel system limitations for > instance. I don't know, I haven't studied the standards. But I would not > be surprised if the difference in load ratings is purely a technicality of > the S-LSA standards. > > The Zodiac kits sold in Europe have to be certificated under European > rules which are also more restrictive than the American E-AB rules, which > probably accounts for the difference in load ratings there. > > I never implied that the difference was because one was utility and one > was standard since those terms in no way apply to either the S-LSA or the > E-AB airworthiness certificates, I merely used the C-150 as an example of > how aircraft specifications can differ for the same type aircraft based on > the certification standards it was being operated under. > > David Mikesell wrote: >> >> >> Hmmm lets see no where did it say Standard or Utility and I have to agree >> if you look at the website, promo material two different ratings. NO not >> like a 150 both the same plane, same weights, same performance but two >> different negative g ratings. I hope just a typing error by the >> webmaster. >> >> David Mikesell >> >>> >>> >>> Two separate claims for two separate standards of airworthiness. What's >>> so odd about that?.... >>> >>>> >>>> So now we have two seperate claims from CH about load factor? One >>>> stating +6/-3 and another at +6/-6? Hhhhmmm. I doubt even the +6. >>>> >>>> >>> > > -- > Bryan Martin > Zenith 601XL N61BM > Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive > Do Not Archive > > > ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 07:12:58 PM PST US From: RURUNY@aol.com Subject: Zenith-List: RE: Dynon installation >but when you attach the 37-pin D-sub connector >and room to curl the wiring, it requires around 10". Also don't forget the tubing for pitot, AOA, and static. It might or might not be an issue see pic at _http://www.701builder.com/electrical10.htm_ (http://www.701builder.com/electrical10.htm) go down to the 9th pic on this page. Brian Unruh Long Island, NY www.701builder.com ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 07:33:23 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Dynon installation There are right angle hoods for "D" connectors. With the connector and hood I would estimate the total depth to be well under 2 inched. A typical datasheet is attached. Digikey sells these for $4.29. But if you need more than 25 pins you will need a different family of hoods (see second datasheet). For the pitot/static lines you could add right-angle unions. -- Craig ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 07:47:43 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Dynon installation Take a look at this diagram: www.dynonavionics.com/downloads/EFIS%20D100.PDF I think the depth you have to worry about is 4.15". The distance from the forward face of the cage to the rear-facing surface of the D connector looks to be 4.15. -- Craig ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 07:48:01 PM PST US From: "Graeme" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Most Pop riviters are air over hydraulic the will use a tiny amount of oil with each pull. after many rivets it will loose stroke. the bottom has to come off the tool the air piston has to be removed you will see the smaller shaft attached to the piston this is the hydraulic piston you need to fill to the top the hole where the small (approx 12mm) piston goes . reassemble gun should be like new again. if it looses stroke to quickly it may need new x rings. Graeme Bell Cairns Australia ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Naumuk To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:04 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products All- I recently had problems with my HF puller- had nothing to do with lube, but with nosepieces working themselves loose. I put a couple of drops of oil in the inlet every time I used the puller, and when I had to tear it apart to find the real reason it wasn't working, oil just gushed out. I don't think oiling every time you pull hurts anything, but I don't think that's the cause of the problem. In my case, I KNOW it wasn't the cause. Bill Naumuk HDS Fuse/Corvair Townville, Pa ----- Original Message ----- From: Stanley Challgren To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:41 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Dred & Dave: OK, I will start over and dump out the oil I added as per the instruction manual. The few drops before each day's use is what I had been doing with the other rivet pullers I have. Guess I should know better than to start reading instructions after 70+ years. Thanks, Stan On Apr 12, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Edward Moody II wrote: In my Harbor Freight puller, I only had trouble when I was putting oil in only periodically. After a year and a half of that practice, it would not reset after each rivet pulled. Once I began to put two - three drops at each work session, it has never given any more problems. Dred ----- Original Message ----- From: TxDave To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:48 AM Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Hey Stan, I have the same pneumatic riveter. You don't need to "prime" it. You only have to put 1 or 2 drops of oil in the inlet periodically to keep the moving parts lubricated. I have pulled thousands of rivets with mine without a hiccup. Sounds like you may have used too much oil. My apologies if I assumed incorrectly. href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matron href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 15/05/2007 10:47 AM ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 07:49:38 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 Hi David, I have trouble accepting your position that an XL is an XL is an XL. The CH601XL is not a single design. The official drawings as released by ZAC allow for considerable choices including engine, wing lockers, lights, aileron trim, fuel tank size, landing gear configuration, and I'm not sure what else. In addition, the CZAW CH601XL had some differences from the ZAC one including composite landing gear instead of aluminum gear. I suspect AMD has its own version of the XL including dual sticks instead of the single stick design that is standard with ZAC. There are also major differences in the aileron hinge design. After that extensive list, you need to include the pathetic fact that ZAC continues to make random design changes without any announcement. I have seen several different elevator trim tab designs, and I know there have been a number of other design changes since I got my prints two years ago. It is these random design changes made by the local ZAC engineers (note that CH has retired to France) that concern me personally the most. Everyone I have talked to at ZAC seems very nice, but none of them has anything even close to Chris's experience designing airplanes. That said, let me repeat that I am delighted Chris has committed to reviewing and testing the current design again. Paul XL fuselage At 07:06 PM 5/15/2007, you wrote: >I have read as many people have the ATSM standards for LSA and no >where would it say to lower or recalculate it lower. I really don't >see what point you are trying to make. The XL is a XL no matter who >builds it. They are built from the same materials and plans to the >standard set by the designer CH. > >David Mikesell ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 08:11:17 PM PST US From: Terry Turnquist Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Some people (because of the poor documentation provided by the Chinese manufacturer) don't realize that their pneumatic rivet puller is only half air driven. The upper part, the piece that actually pulls the rivet is hydraulic, and needs to be filled with oil to about an inch from the top where the small plunger enters the shaft opening. The drop of oil placed in the air opening before each use is for the rest of the moving parts. Terry Turnquist 601-XL Plans Bill Naumuk wrote: All- I recently had problems with my HF puller- had nothing to do with lube, but with nosepieces working themselves loose. I put a couple of drops of oil in the inlet every time I used the puller, and when I had to tear it apart to find the real reason it wasn't working, oil just gushed out. I don't think oiling every time you pull hurts anything, but I don't think that's the cause of the problem. In my case, I KNOW it wasn't the cause. Bill Naumuk HDS Fuse/Corvair Townville, Pa ----- Original Message ----- From: Stanley Challgren To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:41 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Dred & Dave: OK, I will start over and dump out the oil I added as per the instruction manual. The few drops before each day's use is what I had been doing with the other rivet pullers I have. Guess I should know better than to start reading instructions after 70+ years. Thanks, Stan On Apr 12, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Edward Moody II wrote: In my Harbor Freight puller, I only had trouble when I was putting oil in only periodically. After a year and a half of that practice, it would not reset after each rivet pulled. Once I began to put two - three drops at each work session, it has never given any more problems. Dred ----- Original Message ----- From: TxDave To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:48 AM Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Harbor Freight Products Hey Stan, I have the same pneumatic riveter. You don't need to "prime" it. You only have to put 1 or 2 drops of oil in the inlet periodically to keep the moving parts lubricated. I have pulled thousands of rivets with mine without a hiccup. Sounds like you may have used too much oil. My apologies if I assumed incorrectly. href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matronhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com --------------------------------- 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 08:11:57 PM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel Line Length between Wing Tank and Selector Valve? From: "PatrickW" Does anyone know the length of fuel hose required between the wing tank and the fuel selector valve on a 601XL...? I'm looking at the bottom right diagram on page 6-K-2, but I do not see any figures. I have a nice 20' length of braided steel fuel hose that I'd like to cut to proper lengths with minimal waste. Instead of me doing a rough guestimate, does anyone know the length so I can do it right the first time? Thanks, Patrick 601XL/Corvair Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113077#113077 ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 09:06:16 PM PST US From: "Gary Boothe" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Dynon installation Bill, This sounds encouraging for you. Can you move the installation out a bit with a separate "shock" panel? Gary Boothe Cool, CA 601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done, Tail done, wings done, working on c-section -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig Payne Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 7:26 PM Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Dynon installation There are right angle hoods for "D" connectors. With the connector and hood I would estimate the total depth to be well under 2 inched. A typical datasheet is attached. Digikey sells these for $4.29. But if you need more than 25 pins you will need a different family of hoods (see second datasheet). For the pitot/static lines you could add right-angle unions. -- Craig ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 10:12:49 PM PST US From: JohnDRead@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: Re: New letter from Chris Heintz!! 5/11 Instead of uninformed hypothesizing you could try sending a request for clarification to the factory. John Read ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 10:14:49 PM PST US From: JohnDRead@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Aileron stop 6W10-4 Bill: You should be able to download the drawings of the part from the Zenith web site. John Read ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 10:21:18 PM PST US From: JohnDRead@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: 701 wing strut Bill: I would strongly suggest that you use the new strut from the factory. They will no doubt have a fit at the thought that you heated the tube and gave a twist! John Read ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 11:17:47 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Aileron stop 6W10-4 > You should be able to download the drawings of the part from the Zenith web site. >From where on the site? All I know of is the links off of this page which only describe the changes: www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/xl-up-drawings.html -- Craig ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message zenith-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Zenith-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/zenith-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/zenith-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.