Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:33 AM - Comments (Matt Dralle)
1. 03:45 AM - Re: 601XL Wing Spar Jig Question (Gary Ray)
2. 03:47 AM - Re: .093 vs .125 Angle (David Downey)
3. 03:50 AM - Re: Re: PROBLEM. Electrical Grounding with a primed airframe. (David Downey)
4. 05:19 AM - Re: Re: .093 vs .125 Angle (David Downey)
5. 07:44 AM - Re: .093 vs .125 Angle (Art Olechowski)
6. 07:51 AM - Re: .093 vs .125 Angle (Jaybannist@cs.com)
7. 09:02 AM - Re: Electrical grounding with a primed airframe (John M. Goodings)
8. 10:44 AM - Re: PROBLEM. Electrical Grounding with a primed airframe. (steveadams)
9. 10:48 AM - Flanging Dies (Art Olechowski)
10. 10:51 AM - Spar cap angles on 601xl (ashontz)
11. 11:04 AM - Re: 601XL Wing Spar Jig Question (lwhitlow)
12. 11:13 AM - Re: C-GJRL finally flies: CH701 Pegastol, Suzuki 1300 cc (kmccune)
13. 02:53 PM - Construction Pictures Update (George Race)
14. 04:02 PM - Re: Flanging Dies (Ron Lalonde)
15. 04:21 PM - Re: .093 vs .125 Angle (David Downey)
16. 04:32 PM - Re: Re: PROBLEM. Electrical Grounding with a primed airframe. (Paul Mulwitz)
17. 05:19 PM - Re: 601 HD power VS speed (Canatukker)
18. 05:44 PM - Re: Aluminum source in Minneapolis/ST Paul (Bryan Ekholm)
19. 05:57 PM - Re: 701 Arm rest/console (kmccune)
20. 06:00 PM - Re: Aluminum source in Minneapolis/ST Paul (kmccune)
21. 07:26 PM - Re: Flanging Dies (Art Olechowski)
22. 07:43 PM - Re: Flanging Dies (R.D.(Ron) Leclerc)
23. 08:51 PM - Re: Spar cap angles on 601xl (Ron Lendon)
24. 09:06 PM - Re: AOA port location (Craig Payne)
25. 09:47 PM - Re: hds drawing (Dave Thompson)
Message 0
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Dear Listers,
Below are a few more of the nice comments Listers have been making along with their
Contributions in support of the Lists this year. Please make your Contribution
today to support the continued operation and upgrade of these services.
Remember, there is _no advertising budget_ to keep these Lists funded. It is
solely through your generosity that they continue.
Please make a Contribution:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator
------------------------------What Listers Are Saying------------------------------
The list has been invaluable in the building of my Zenith CH701.
George R
Thanks for keeping the lists a non-commercial venue for us
to gather and share knowledge.
Neal G
What a fantastic resource!
Ralph C
It's a pretty cheep troubleshooting tool with and unlimited
resource of personal knowledge.
Bruce G
A full house of Info & Ideas...
Ellery B
I really enjoy the Piet list.
Steven D
The Lists are an indispensable resource for those of us
building OBAM aircraft.
Bret S
..a great service.
Frank D
..all in all it is a great resource if you ask specific
questions.
Richard S
Your list has really helped me in my first build.
Michael W
Always a pleasure to support this great resource...
Richard W
I enjoy the lists very much, they are very beneficial.
Bob L
Great place to chat with other builders and Flyers.
Ellery B
Your lists are a great service to builders and owners!
Richard D
A real good place for someone that is starting to get
interested into flying without investing any money at
first.
Ellery B
The list has been an great help to my building process.
David B
I'm close to finishing my Zenith 601 thanks to you and
the Zenith List.
Jeff D
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Wing Spar Jig Question |
Larry
I don't have my plans handy for the actual measurements.
The wing jig establishes the angle and distance between the tilted front
spar carry thru and the tilted rear spar carry thru.
I believe the hole placement is important since the dihedral and the tilt of
the spar carry thru will affect the geometry of the fit. This effect can
also be seen in the forward sweep of the wing tips after your wings are on.
Be sure that after you make the right and left jigs that they match up
perfectly when standing next to each other face to face. They are right &
left handed as are the wings. If not something is wrong. My first attempt
was off due to a slightly bad measurement and they did not match by more
than 1 inch which would have messed up my wing attachment later.
Due to storage space my wings were never matched to the fuselage until
attachment at the hanger. With accurate jigs I did not run into any
surprises. This was an item of concern. I did take the jigs to the wings,
which were built before the fuselage, to measure and compare but it is
another of the mirror image problems when measuring.
It is possible to confirm the future fit.
Gary Ray, 601XL, 58 TT
----- Original Message -----
From: "lwhitlow" <ldwhitlow@comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 3:01 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 601XL Wing Spar Jig Question
>
> I'm stumped and the drawings /photo guide aren't as clear to me as I would
like.SOOOOOOO Here's the question
>
> Page 5 of the photo guide WING JIG REF 6-B-14
>
> I'm trying to drill the holes in the spar insert but I'm not quite sure
where they go
>
> Looking at the little drawing in the upper Right of page 5 I that one of
the holes is 132mm from the extrusion Is this the bottom hole or the top??
>
> Once I establish that I can use the Pic at the bottom to find the other
hole
>
> And then the second question is After I get done building this jig, When
is it used?? I see no other mention of it in the photo guide after you make
it??
>
> Or do you just use it to check the spar to rear channel distance as you go
along
>
> Thanks
>
> Larry Whitlow
> 601XL/Jabiru 3300 50% done 80% to go, Engine due in February
>
> One of the last kits before the CNC kits started coming out
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148108#148108
>
>
> --
5:15 PM
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: .093 vs .125 Angle |
since Wicks lists the 0.062 at 0.106 lb/running root and 0.125 at 0.200 lb/running
foot, I would assume that the value for 0.09375 would be calculatable.
Hey all you scratch builders have any of you calculated the weight increase when
using the .125
3/4" X 3/4" angle opposed to the kit supplied .093 thickness? I imagine the amount
is small but it
does reduce your useful load. Does anyone know what the per foot weight of .093
is? If not could
one of the kit builders measure and weigh a piece, then post it for archiving?
Thanks,
Art
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
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: PROBLEM. Electrical Grounding with a primed airframe. |
running them separately is desirable to minimize the potential for a battery direct
short in the case of wear or an incident. Of course with an aluminum airframe,
that may be a moot point!
Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net> wrote: Hi Geoff & Ed,
I guess it was me you refer to, Ed . . . :-) . . .
No, I would not suggest twisting the battery cables. These are the extra heavy
gauge wires needed to supply the 100 or so amps to the starter for a few seconds
at a time. Twisting would be appropriate if they were high frequence signal
wires, but this is a high current DC application.
You can probably run the wires together to the engine compartment if you like.
The only caveat is you need to make sure the insulation is not broken so a short
can occur. You will probably ground the aluminum in the airplane anyway
(connect to the negative battery contact) so the only real critical insulation
is on the positive lead cable.
If you prefer to run them separately then that is fine too.
One more comment. Several guys seem to think the engine mount is a good place
to form your single ground point for the whole plane. This means the place the
negative battery lead is attached and as many other negative lead wires as
you connect to ground. Actually, I would prefer some piece of copper or aluminum
(bus bar?) for this purpose. The steel engine mount is probably the worst
electrical conductor in the whole plane, and it would be better to use a good
conductor for this purpose.
Good luck,
Paul
XL fuselage
At 10:56 AM 11/23/2007, you wrote:
Might be good to run them as a twisted pair. Electronic gurus on the list can
confirm or correct.
Dred
----- Original Message -----
From: Geoff Heap
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 7:06 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: PROBLEM. Electrical Grounding with a primed airframe.
As usual everyone came through. Thanks for the help. This is why I send Matt
Draille 60 bucks every year. I have to go with the majority. I'm sure I wont
regret having a better electrical system.
Now the question becomes. How close can I have these two cables to each
other? I'm assuming it would be a problem running them side by side....Geoff
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: .093 vs .125 Angle |
maybe 0.09375" but certainly not 0.032"???
"T. Graziano" <tonyplane@bellsouth.net> wrote: Cut a piece of 0.032 x 1.5
inch x 12 inches long. Weight it and that is the delta/ft. (with a 1 inch
long piece it would be the delta per inch)
Tony Graziano
------------
Subject: .093 vs .125 Angle From:
Art Olechowski (ifly4fun2@sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri Nov
23 - 7:43 PM
Hey all you scratch builders have any of you calculated the weight increase when
using the .125
3/4" X 3/4" angle opposed to the kit supplied .093 thickness? I imagine the amount
is small but it
does reduce your useful load. Does anyone know what the per foot weight of .093
is? If not could
one of the kit builders measure and weigh a piece, then post it for archiving?
Thanks,
Art
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: .093 vs .125 Angle |
John,
Kind of figured someone had determined the weight penalty. Thanks, John.
Art
--- Bolding <jnbolding1@teleshare.net> wrote:
>
> If you are refering to the 701 it's about a 4 # penalty. John
>
>
>
>
> >
> >Hey all you scratch builders have any of you calculated the weight increase
when using the .125
> >3/4" X 3/4" angle opposed to the kit supplied .093 thickness? I imagine the
amount is small but
> it
> >does reduce your useful load. Does anyone know what the per foot weight of
.093 is? If not
> could
> >one of the kit builders measure and weigh a piece, then post it for archiving?
> >
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Art
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: .093 vs .125 Angle |
Dave, As with about a third of your posts, there was no message in the original
posting. When I hit "reply", your complete posting showed up.
Jay
David Downey <planecrazydld@yahoo.com> wrote:
>since Wicks lists the 0.062 at 0.106 lb/running root and 0.125 at 0.200 lb/running
foot, I would assume that the value for 0.09375 would be calculatable.
>
>
>Hey all you scratch builders have any of you calculated the weight increase when
using the .125
>3/4" X 3/4" angle opposed to the kit supplied .093 thickness? I imagine the amount
is small but it
>does reduce your useful load. Does anyone know what the per foot weight of .093
is? If not could
>one of the kit builders measure and weigh a piece, then post it for archiving?
>
>
>Thanks,
>Art
>
>
> Dave Downey
> Harleysville (SE) PA
> 100 HP Corvair
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
>
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: Electrical grounding with a primed airframe |
I would run the pair of battery cables close together; twisting them is
not necessary. Here is my reasoning - long on theory and speculation!
Radiation pick-up, particularly of radio frequency, is a black art. We
have had a difficult time removing noise from a Becker transponder which
was getting onto our ICOM radio, and breaking up the transmission and
reception. We were able to trace the noise as being present on the power
bus, to which the radio was attached. The cure was to place an
(electrically isolated) Ameri-King noise filter in the power leads to the
radio. Other locations of the filter should have worked, but did not.
How does any of this apply to the question posed about the battery leads?
If the long battery leads are well separated, what you have created is one
turn of a large coil which is an integral part of the power bus. A large
turn of a coil has appreciable inductance, which can act as an antenna for
radio frequency. The inductance increases with the area of the coil; two
wires close together have only a very small coil area. In our case, we
did not have long battery leads. Nevertheless, the principles outlined
above are basically sound. Thus, if I had long battery leads, I would NOT
separate them!
John Goodings, C-FGPJ, CH601HD with R912S, Carp/Ottawa, Toronto/Waterloo.
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: PROBLEM. Electrical Grounding with a primed airframe. |
I don't know if you follow Bob Nucholls stuff in the Aeroelectric section, but
this topic has come up there numerous times. I'm no electrical expert so I can
only say what I have done and what experts like Bob have recommended. Basically
with an aluminum airframe there is no reason to run a ground cable forward
to the firewall. There is enough contact with the rivets, even if everything is
primed, to provide an ample path for the electrons to flow. You'll find more
resistance in a 2 G cable than you'll see in the airframe. You can also safely
ground pitot heat, landing lights, and position lights locally.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148273#148273
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 |
|
Hi all just thought I would shoot out the link of the source of the machined flanging
dies.
Anyone have a set of these? If so, are you happy with results they make?
http://www.skysailor.org/
Art
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: | Spar cap angles on 601xl |
Question for those using the butt joint method for the spar cap angles (two shorter
lengths instead of one nearly 12 foot length spar cap angle). Seeing as how
this is a work around for people with shorter bending brakes and is not in
the plans, what is the length of the doubler that spans that butt joint?
Thanks
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148275#148275
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: 601XL Wing Spar Jig Question |
Gary
After a little sleep and your's and Paul's notes, things have become much clearer.
Combined with READING THE RIGHT PAGE OF THE PLANS [Embarassed] !!!!!!!
It seems in my stupor, I never looked at 6-B-13 which clearly shows the location
of the holes. I was only looking at 6-B-14 and the Photo guide.
I feel pretty silly but thanks to you guys and the list, I have once again avoided
the dreaded STUPIDITY SYNDROME ( tm ) [Rolling Eyes]
Now back to my other hobby Nuclear Physics where accuracy is not as necessary [Wink]
Thanks Guys
Larry
davgray(at)sbcglobal.net wrote:
> Larry
>
> I don't have my plans handy for the actual measurements.
>
> The wing jig establishes the angle and distance between the tilted front
> spar carry thru and the tilted rear spar carry thru.
>
> I believe the hole placement is important since the dihedral and the tilt of
> the spar carry thru will affect the geometry of the fit. This effect can
> also be seen in the forward sweep of the wing tips after your wings are on.
>
> Be sure that after you make the right and left jigs that they match up
> perfectly when standing next to each other face to face. They are right &
> left handed as are the wings. If not something is wrong. My first attempt
> was off due to a slightly bad measurement and they did not match by more
> than 1 inch which would have messed up my wing attachment later.
> Due to storage space my wings were never matched to the fuselage until
> attachment at the hanger. With accurate jigs I did not run into any
> surprises. This was an item of concern. I did take the jigs to the wings,
> which were built before the fuselage, to measure and compare but it is
> another of the mirror image problems when measuring.
> It is possible to confirm the future fit.
>
> Gary Ray, 601XL, 58 TT
>
>
> ---
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148276#148276
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: C-GJRL finally flies: CH701 Pegastol, Suzuki 1300 cc |
RE: 90hp
I just found this Dyno curve last night for the G13B. It is of a stock 1.3l GTI/GT
injected but not turbo-ed engine. I don't know what Raven does to the engine,
if anything, but stock for stock it appears to compare very nicely with
the 912S for a lot less!
Kevin
--------
Kevin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148278#148278
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/g13b_dyno_579.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 |
|
| Subject: | Construction Pictures Update |
Over the past months, several of you have ask about picture updates on my
web site. I FINALLY got around to it toady!
There are 386 pictures on the site for you to now see, out of the almost
1500 I have taken so far.
Included are my modification for dual sticks, electric flap actuator, rear
bottom service access, and a lot more little things that I have added along
the way.
You can get directly to the pictures at:
http://www.mykitairplane.com/MyCH701/index.htm
George Race
Albion MI
Building Zenith CH-701
N73EX (Reserved)
do not archive
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Flanging blanks? What about a completed set..I think these need to be machi
ned
Ron
> Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 10:47:23 -0800> From: ifly4fun2@sbcglobal.net> Sub
ject: Zenith-List: Flanging Dies> To: zenith-list@matronics.com> > --> Zeni
th-List message posted by: Art Olechowski <ifly4fun2@sbcglobal.net>> > Hi a
ll just thought I would shoot out the link of the source of the machined fl
anging dies.> Anyone have a set of these? If so, are you happy with results
==================> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Have fun while connecting on Messenger! Click here to learn more.
http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger
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: .093 vs .125 Angle |
Thanks Jay;
...and I am not smart enough to figure out how to fix it!
Dave, As with about a third of your posts, there was no message in the original
posting. When I hit "reply", your complete posting showed up.
Jay
David Downey
wrote:
>since Wicks lists the 0.062 at 0.106 lb/running root and 0.125 at 0.200 lb/running
foot, I would assume that the value for 0.09375 would be calculatable.
>
>
>Hey all you scratch builders have any of you calculated the weight increase when
using the .125
>3/4" X 3/4" angle opposed to the kit supplied .093 thickness? I imagine the amount
is small but it
>does reduce your useful load. Does anyone know what the per foot weight of .093
is? If not could
>one of the kit builders measure and weigh a piece, then post it for archiving?
>
>
>Thanks,
>Art
>
>
> Dave Downey
> Harleysville (SE) PA
> 100 HP Corvair
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
>
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: PROBLEM. Electrical Grounding with a primed airframe. |
Hi Steve,
I'm sure you are right about the resistance of the aluminum airframe
compared to the much smaller cross section copper cable. However, I
don't think this is the only issue.
It seems to me that it is much safer to use the ground cable to get
from a remote battery to the engine compartment. If you rely on the
airframe for this purpose, I would certainly install an avionics
master switch and make sure the avionics are isolated when the
starter is operated.
I realize there is a weight penalty using the copper cable for
grounding the battery. However, moving the weight around to get the
CG in order is the whole point of moving the battery anyway. OK,
this is a lame argument . . .
Paul
XL fuselage
At 10:40 AM 11/24/2007, you wrote:
>I don't know if you follow Bob Nucholls stuff in the Aeroelectric
>section, but this topic has come up there numerous times. I'm no
>electrical expert so I can only say what I have done and what
>experts like Bob have recommended. Basically with an aluminum
>airframe there is no reason to run a ground cable forward to the
>firewall. There is enough contact with the rivets, even if
>everything is primed, to provide an ample path for the electrons to
>flow. You'll find more resistance in a 2 G cable than you'll see in
>the airframe. You can also safely ground pitot heat, landing lights,
>and position lights locally.
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601 HD power VS speed |
eedetail wrote:
> 80 HP Rotax 912UL.
> 105 mph TAS at about 4900 rpm, 4.7 gph (I figure 5gph)
> Note that factory says 75% power at 8000 feet is 5800 rpm, full throttle.
> Ivo inflight adjustable 3 blade prop, I will be adding a MAP gage, so more experimentation
is in order.
> TimE
How big(long) are Your Ivo blades I have used In flight adjust before on a Fisher
Super Koala 912 and was very happy with it take off like a rocket
now i'm looking to put one on my zodiac 601 ul 912 ul thanks for You'r replay
Ron.
P.S. I also have my eye on a Kiev or Kool prop. if anyone has some input I'm looking
forward to it.
--------
Have fun fly save
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148312#148312
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum source in Minneapolis/ST Paul |
Kevin,
I bought my sheet and plate aluminum from Erickson Metals in Coon Rapids, MN, a
suburb to the North-West of Minneapolis. The Aluminum tube I picked up from
Discount Steel and Aluminum in Minneapolis.
Bryan Ekholm
--------
Bryan Ekholm
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148319#148319
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: 701 Arm rest/console |
Here it is,
Kevin
--------
Kevin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148327#148327
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/armrest_892.jpg
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum source in Minneapolis/ST Paul |
Thanks for the info guys! I hope to meet you guys to see what my pile of parts
can be!
Kevin
PS I get to Coon Rapids every once in awhile so that should work.
--------
Kevin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148328#148328
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 |
|
Ron,
I'm glad you looked at those closer than I did, your absolutly correct they are
flanging blanks.
Art
--- Ron Lalonde <rlalonde@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Flanging blanks? What about a completed set..I think these need to be machined
> Ron
>
>
>
> > Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 10:47:23 -0800> From: ifly4fun2@sbcglobal.net> Subject:
Zenith-List:
> Olechowski <ifly4fun2@sbcglobal.net>> > Hi all just thought I would shoot out
the link of the
> source of the machined flanging dies.> Anyone have a set of these? If so, are
you happy with
> results==================> > >
> _________________________________________________________________
> Have fun while connecting on Messenger! Click here to learn more.
> http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger
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 |
|
Art..
Check these out... Ron
:-{
:-{
:-{ Ron,
:-{ I'm glad you looked at those closer than I did, your absolutly
:-{ correct they are flanging blanks.
:-{
:-{
:-{ Art
:-{
:-{ --- Ron Lalonde wrote:
:-{
:-{:-{ Flanging blanks? What about a completed set..I think these
:-{:-{ need to be machined Ron
:-{:-{
:-{:-{
:-{:-{:-{ Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 10:47:23 -0800> From:
:-{:-{:-{ ifly4fun2@sbcglobal.net> Subject: Zenith-List:
:-{:-{:-{
:-{:-{ Flanging Dies> To: zenith-list@matronics.com> > --> Zenith-
:-{:-{ List message posted by: Art Olechowski
:-{:-{ > > Hi all just thought I would
:-{:-{ shoot out the link of the source of the machined flanging
:-{:-{ dies.> Anyone have a set of these? If so, are you happy with
:-{:-{ results==================> > >
:-{:-{ _________________________________________________________________
Have
:-{:-{ fun while connecting on Messenger! Click here to learn more.
:-{:-{ http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/WindowsLiveMessenger
:-{
:-{
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: Spar cap angles on 601xl |
Is this the splice you are talking about? Found it on ch601.org
http://ch601.org/resources/rear%20spar/601xl_rear_spar_splice.htm
--------
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=148348#148348
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | AOA port location |
Are you worried about the distance fore/aft distance from the leading edge
or from the wing tip or both? AFS's install manual gives some guidance on
cord distance. I have embedded 5 pictures of the right wing of Mike Sigman's
601XL (N7092N). Basically he placed the probes forward (but close to) the
spar and outside (but close to) the outmost nose rib. Just don't forget to
offset the upper and lower probes so they don't hit when you close the wing
J.
My reading indicates that the placement is not extremely critical and that
the calibration can accommodated a range of placements.
If the pictures don't make it through let me know and I'll mail them to you
direct.
-- Craig
IMG_0938
IMG_0937
IMG_0930
IMG_0931
IMG_0932
-- Craig
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Back in the mid 80's my Dad, Brother & I built a Quickie. We put together a
three view line drawing and took copies to the local City College Art
Department. We found an art teacher who agreed to distribute them to the Art
Students. We offered a gift Certificate for Dinner for two at a local
restaurant for the best paint scheme. We got over 30 entries back!
We got some very interesting ideas back, some elegant and some, well not so.
The end result was a mixture of ideas. We ended up giving a Pizza party for
all the people who wanted to come see the plane after it was painted.
We had lots of fun and got a bunch of good ideas.
Dave Thompson
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! --
|