Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:37 AM - Re: Re: Aircraft Spruce Streamlined Tubing (David Downey)
2. 04:41 AM - Chris Heintz on VGs (kmccune)
3. 04:44 AM - Re: Aircraft Spruce Streamlined Tubing (kmccune)
4. 06:20 AM - Re: 601Wing Failures - a different perspective601Wing Failures - (Gig Giacona)
5. 07:00 AM - Re: Re: Canopy Gas Struts (Springs) (robert stone)
6. 07:09 AM - Re: Chris Heintz on VGs (ronlee)
7. 08:06 AM - Re: Re: 601Wing Failures - a different perspective601Wing Failures - (Carl)
8. 08:38 AM - Prop Bolt Patterns (LRM)
9. 09:06 AM - Re: Prop bolt pattern (Zed Smith)
10. 09:38 AM - Re: Re: Canopy Gas Struts (Springs) (Ronald Steele)
11. 10:18 AM - Re: Prop Bolt Patterns (Mike Fothergill)
12. 11:48 AM - DEC 26,07 (dj45)
13. 12:23 PM - Bending brake for 701 (Jerry Hey)
14. 12:24 PM - Tow Bar (Jaybannist@cs.com)
15. 01:11 PM - Re: DEC 26,07 (John Marzulli)
16. 01:21 PM - Re: Bending brake for 701 (ROBERT SCEPPA)
17. 01:53 PM - Re: Canopy Gas Struts (Springs) (Tommy Walker)
18. 02:48 PM - Re: Tow Bar (Southern Reflections)
19. 02:59 PM - Re: Chris Heintz on VGs (kmccune)
20. 03:02 PM - Re: DEC 26,07 (kmccune)
21. 04:01 PM - Re: DEC 26,07 (Juan Vega)
22. 04:38 PM - Re: Bending brake for 701 (Jerry Hey)
23. 04:49 PM - Re: Bending brake for 701 (LarryMcFarland)
24. 04:57 PM - Re: Tow Bar (LarryMcFarland)
25. 05:09 PM - Re: DEC 26,07 (Art Olechowski)
26. 05:13 PM - Re: Bending brake for 701 (Art Olechowski)
27. 05:34 PM - Re: DEC 26,07 (George Race)
28. 05:47 PM - Re: Tow Bar (RURUNY@aol.com)
29. 06:03 PM - Re: Bending brake for 701 (Jerry Hey)
30. 06:07 PM - Re: Bending brake for 701 (Randy L. Thwing)
31. 06:52 PM - Re: Prop Bolt Patterns (LRM)
32. 07:46 PM - Re: DEC 26,07 (n801bh@netzero.com)
33. 08:04 PM - Re: Bending brake for 701 (Jerry Hey)
34. 08:21 PM - Re: DEC 26,07 (Ron Lendon)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft Spruce Streamlined Tubing |
just like the plug you make to bolt the Carlson shape to - the difference is that
the inside shape is an airfoil on the drawn tube and flat on the Carlson.
I will not have access to e-mail for several days. Everyone have a safe and prosperous
New Year.
So... you need to make a plug to fit inside, to bolt to the wing?
Kevin
--------
Kevin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154273#154273
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: | Chris Heintz on VGs |
I searched and couldn't find any reference to this article so here is the link.
It is significant that he states "From a design standpoint, I have no objection
to the removal of the leading edge slats (and their attachment brackets) and
replacing them with VGs" in the article. Now that IS out of context, but it
addresses some on the objections made here regarding the removal of the slats.
Anyway here is the link read away and draw your own conclusions.
http://www.zenithair.com/stolch801/design/slats-vs-vg-design.html
Kevin
--------
Kevin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154300#154300
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: Aircraft Spruce Streamlined Tubing |
[quote="planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co"]Be a better friend, newshound, and
> [b]
What does this mean?
Kevin
--------
Kevin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154301#154301
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: 601Wing Failures - a different perspective601Wing Failures |
-
I've never experienced flutter though I have hit turbulence when I was above the
maneuvering speed of the aircraft. In both cases you don't want to increase
the G forces on the aircraft especially the wings. As draggy as the 601 is pulling
the throttle ought to reduce speed quickly enough that a nose up isn't needed.
To a certain extend this should be true in any aircraft because as long
as you are reacting very shortly after the onset of the flutter the power reduction
ought to get you back below the flutter threshold in a timely fashion.
aprazer wrote:
> Gig,
> Thanks for the reply! Your point makes sense! Let's discuss this further. In
reducing speed, one should pull back on the throttle, but should one ease the
nose up as well? What have others done that experienced flutter and are still
here to talk about it?
> Mack
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154310#154310
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: Canopy Gas Struts (Springs) |
Tommy.
You are right about one thing, the PIC is responsible for insuring that
the canopy is latched prior to take off. However the designer/producer of
the aircraft in question is responsible for insuring that his design is safe
and airworthy and with as many reports as I have seen on this forum about
canopies opening in flight including my own, I think the design is flawed.
Even though the aircraft is well built I had to glue strips of foam rubber
on the bottom side of the rear seal to keep cold air out. Also, this canopy
is too heavy for the supplied 40# gas struts because before I installed the
60# struts my canopy slammed down several times. One time was at our last
Young Eagles Flight Rally and a 10 year old boy got bonked on the head.
That's when I decided to do something about the weak struts.
Bob Stone
Harker Heights, Tx
ZodiacXL w/Jabiru 3300
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tommy Walker" <twalker@cableone.net>
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2007 8:26 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Canopy Gas Struts (Springs)
>
> Craig,
>
> That compares with a situation the guy in the next hangar told me about.
>
> a guy with a 601 at my field told me this; he forgot to securely latch the
> canopy on the right side. After takeoff, he noticed it due to the noise.
> He attempted to pull the right side down and latch it securely. This guy
> is about 6?T 4? and is a bear of a man. He said he couldn?Tt get it
> down, so he decided to loosen the left side so that he could level the
> canopy and then pull both sides down and close the latches.
>
> Big Mistake.
>
> He said the canopy immediately went to about 45 degrees and he entered a
> steep dive. He was able to reduce power, level off and gain control over
> the airplane. At full power, he was not able to climb, as the canopy
> acted like a speed brake.? At full power, he headed back to the airport
> at his present level and was able to land. He said everything that was
> unsecured (insecured?) err, not secure, in the airplane departed,
> including extra headsets, gps, log books, etc.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tommy Walker in Alabama
> N8701 18.5 hrs
>
> P.S. Please don't take this as criticism of the 601 design. The PIC is
> responsible for making sure the canopy is secure before takeoff.
>
> [quote="
> www.evektoramerica.com/SportStarPlus.htm
>
> The canopy popped while we were in the pattern. I would estimate that the
> gap was well over a foot. While the instructor flew I tried to close the
> canopy. I wrapped my arm around the cross-bar and used all my weight and
> strength and could not close the canopy. At best I think I got the gap
> down to 6-8 inches. Evector redesigned the latch the next year.
>
> I believe the upward force was generated by lift and not wind under the
> canopy as it did not decrease as I closed the gap.
>
> -- Craig[/quote]
>
> --------
> Tommy Walker
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154165#154165
>
>
>
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: Chris Heintz on VGs |
I have taken the slats off my 701 about 50 hours ago. I have to say that at the
first take off I said to myself, I like this, my opinion is still the same.
The plane seemed to climb easier and better. In flight there is no perceptible
difference with or without slats including the trim setting. It is a bit faster,
not sure how much though. It isn't enough excited about. Now when it comes
to landing there is no comparison, The flare is easy and smooth, I can hold
the nose wheel off the ground as long as I want. With slats I had trouble letting
the nose wheel down gently. If I tried to hold it off and all was not perfect
the tail wanted to go down and if I eased up on the stick I may put the nose
wheel down harder then I wished, even though I wanted to keep it up. I can
now do what one would consider a normal flare landing much, much easier. It does
does float on landing almost like a normal plane now so I am sure I use more
(very little) runway. I haven't tested the take off, but really don't believe
I have lost a thing there, if any it certainly isn't detectable flying the
airplane. I will say again that I like to fly the plane better without slats.
If one needs to use the very least space for landing, I say leave the slats on.
If you want a plane that flies like I described, take them off and install VGs.
If you are unhappy put the slats back on. After all, it is only about an hour
job, so it isn't a major undertaking. I would venture to say few would re-
install the slats.
--------
Ron Lee
Tucson, Arizona
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154316#154316
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: 601Wing Failures - a different perspective601Wing |
Failures -
GIG.
Good point to consider. Flutter, especially the divergent\unstable type, may
continue well below the speed at which it started and stopping it quickly is
paramount.
Anyone looking for more info should Google "Aerodynamic Flutter".
Carl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 9:18 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601Wing Failures - a different perspective601Wing
Failures -
> <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net>
>
> I've never experienced flutter though I have hit turbulence when I was
> above the maneuvering speed of the aircraft. In both cases you don't want
> to increase the G forces on the aircraft especially the wings. As draggy
> as the 601 is pulling the throttle ought to reduce speed quickly enough
> that a nose up isn't needed. To a certain extend this should be true in
> any aircraft because as long as you are reacting very shortly after the
> onset of the flutter the power reduction ought to get you back below the
> flutter threshold in a timely fashion.
>
>
> aprazer wrote:
>> Gig,
>> Thanks for the reply! Your point makes sense! Let's discuss this further.
>> In reducing speed, one should pull back on the throttle, but should one
>> ease the nose up as well? What have others done that experienced flutter
>> and are still here to talk about it?
>> Mack
>
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154310#154310
>
>
>
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: | Prop Bolt Patterns |
The bolt pattern for my new PRSU measures out to be 100mm with 6 3/8"
bolts. That is supposed to be the large Rotax, right? Now I am
confused because I called Powerfin about a new prop. They said "no it's
a 4" or 101,6mm pattern". Well, I can read a caliber unless it's Miller
time. I have four calipers, they all lie at times. So I argued with
the guy. He almost convinced me my PRSU was drilled wrong. He wasn't
that convincing because I didn't buy a prop, yet. I had an old spacer
plate for an SAE-1. Just for fun, I put it in the end mill and drilled
a 4" pattern in between the 4 3/8" pattern. Took it over to the PRSU
and of course it was too big by about 1.6mm. I knew it would be, but
seeing is believing, plus it was scrap anyway.
I am still confused, Culver says it a large 100mm Rotax. Powerfin says
they would have to drill a special prop hub for me because the large
Rotax is 4". Are there two large Rotax patterns? It wouldn't surprise
me. Everybody knows more about this stuff than I do, so someone please
straighten me out. Does anyone know where I can find a chart of all the
different small bolt patterns for our type of engines?
Building cars was less confusing and a whole lot cheaper.
LRM, www.skyhawg.com
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Prop bolt pattern |
do not archive
Last time I had the 'apples & oranges' chat about prop flange bolt pattern I put
a piece of stiff paper against the flange and traced holes and outside diameter.
Next thing I did was lay the tracing and a 'standard' and a 'metric' ruler on a
flatbed scanner and scanned the whole mess. Faxed this to the guy.....he then
had the hole pattern AND a reference measurement.
Phone rang in a few minutes; "Oh," he says, "why didn't you say so"!
Regards,
Zed
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Gas Struts (Springs) |
I think it's worth pointing out that, in fact, even if the design is
flawed, the designer of an experimental aircraft isn't responsible
for the airplane, the builder is. That's why it's an experimental.
It's a responsibility that's all to easy to ignore for us kit
builders, but it's the reality and something we shouldn't forget.
Sounds like there needs to be a checklist item for these latches -
another builder responsibility.
That said, I'm sure CH and everyone at Zenith is very serious about
safety and if they felt there were issues they would be corrected.
I'm guessing the issue with the struts is one of stress on the canopy
when the struts are new (you don't want to stress the canopy while
closing it) verses struts that weaken over time or are not up to
snuff when new.
Perhaps we should all test the strut strength before installation.
This is the type of discussion that makes this list so valuable. It
must have been really lonely being a builder before the days of the
internet.
Ron
On Dec 26, 2007, at 10:00 AM, robert stone wrote:
>
> Tommy.
> You are right about one thing, the PIC is responsible for
> insuring that the canopy is latched prior to take off. However the
> designer/producer of the aircraft in question is responsible for
> insuring that his design is safe and airworthy and with as many
> reports as I have seen on this forum about canopies opening in
> flight including my own, I think the design is flawed. Even though
> the aircraft is well built I had to glue strips of foam rubber on
> the bottom side of the rear seal to keep cold air out. Also, this
> canopy is too heavy for the supplied 40# gas struts because before
> I installed the 60# struts my canopy slammed down several times.
> One time was at our last Young Eagles Flight Rally and a 10 year
> old boy got bonked on the head. That's when I decided to do
> something about the weak struts.
>
> Bob Stone
> Harker Heights, Tx
> ZodiacXL w/Jabiru 3300
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tommy Walker"
> <twalker@cableone.net>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2007 8:26 AM
> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Canopy Gas Struts (Springs)
>
>
>> <twalker@cableone.net>
>>
>> Craig,
>>
>> That compares with a situation the guy in the next hangar told me
>> about.
>>
>> a guy with a 601 at my field told me this; he forgot to securely
>> latch the canopy on the right side. After takeoff, he noticed it
>> due to the noise. He attempted to pull the right side down and
>> latch it securely. This guy is about 6?T 4? and is a bear of a
>> man. He said he couldn?Tt get it down, so he decided to loosen
>> the left side so that he could level the canopy and then pull both
>> sides down and close the latches.
>>
>> Big Mistake.
>>
>> He said the canopy immediately went to about 45 degrees and he
>> entered a steep dive. He was able to reduce power, level off and
>> gain control over the airplane. At full power, he was not able to
>> climb, as the canopy acted like a speed brake.? At full power,
>> he headed back to the airport at his present level and was able to
>> land. He said everything that was unsecured (insecured?) err, not
>> secure, in the airplane departed, including extra headsets, gps,
>> log books, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tommy Walker in Alabama
>> N8701 18.5 hrs
>>
>> P.S. Please don't take this as criticism of the 601 design. The
>> PIC is responsible for making sure the canopy is secure before
>> takeoff.
>>
>> [quote="
>> www.evektoramerica.com/SportStarPlus.htm
>>
>> The canopy popped while we were in the pattern. I would estimate
>> that the gap was well over a foot. While the instructor flew I
>> tried to close the canopy. I wrapped my arm around the cross-bar
>> and used all my weight and strength and could not close the
>> canopy. At best I think I got the gap down to 6-8 inches. Evector
>> redesigned the latch the next year.
>>
>> I believe the upward force was generated by lift and not wind
>> under the canopy as it did not decrease as I closed the gap.
>>
>> -- Craig[/quote]
>>
>> --------
>> Tommy Walker
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154165#154165
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Prop Bolt Patterns |
Hi;
The "old" 912s had the 100mm bolt circle. New 912s have a 4 inch or
101.6 dia bolt circle. The bolts are still 8 mm.
Mike
CH601HDS 1200+ hrs
UHS Spinners
LRM wrote:
> The bolt pattern for my new PRSU measures out to be 100mm with 6 3/8"
> bolts. That is supposed to be the large Rotax, right? Now I am
> confused because I called Powerfin about a new prop. They said "no it's
> a 4" or 101,6mm pattern". Well, I can read a caliber unless it's Miller
> time. I have four calipers, they all lie at times. So I argued with
> the guy. He almost convinced me my PRSU was drilled wrong. He wasn't
> that convincing because I didn't buy a prop, yet. I had an old spacer
> plate for an SAE-1. Just for fun, I put it in the end mill and drilled
> a 4" pattern in between the 4 3/8" pattern. Took it over to the PRSU
> and of course it was too big by about 1.6mm. I knew it would be, but
> seeing is believing, plus it was scrap anyway.
>
> I am still confused, Culver says it a large 100mm Rotax. Powerfin says
> they would have to drill a special prop hub for me because the large
> Rotax is 4". Are there two large Rotax patterns? It wouldn't surprise
> me. Everybody knows more about this stuff than I do, so someone please
> straighten me out. Does anyone know where I can find a chart of all the
> different small bolt patterns for our type of engines?
>
> Building cars was less confusing and a whole lot cheaper.
>
> LRM, www.skyhawg.com <http://www.skyhawg.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
I am proud to say that N9801S flew off the board without a single problem!
Left the ground at about 55 mph and never looked back. All the trims were dead
on. Didn't do a full stall, but did get it slowed down to 40 with no flaps with
just a slight buffeting, no stall.
All testing went without a hitch.
Landing was just about perfect at 55 with no flaps.
--------
Do not archive
Dan Stanton
100% Done
801, IO360
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154377#154377
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: | Bending brake for 701 |
Hi all, Even though I have had the plans since last spring, I am
just getting started on scratch building a 701. I have decided to
build a brake using Larry McFarland's plans which I just ordered
today. My question is what is the longest piece requiring bending in
the 701? I think it is the main spar which is 3110 mm (10.2 ft). If
I am right in this a 10.5 foot brake is required. Is this correct?
Thanks, Jerry
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 |
|
Listers:
On the Spruce & Wick's web sites, I see lots of tow bars. No specs. Does anyone
know what specific model of tow bar will work with the 60XL nose gear axle?
Jay in Dallas 601XL N2630J
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 |
|
Congrats!
Enjoy the grin that is probably ear to ear right now, you earned it.
On Dec 26, 2007 11:47 AM, dj45 <dj45@modempool.com> wrote:
>
> I am proud to say that N9801S flew off the board without a single problem!
> Left the ground at about 55 mph and never looked back. All the trims were
> dead on. Didn't do a full stall, but did get it slowed down to 40 with no
> flaps with just a slight buffeting, no stall.
> All testing went without a hitch.
> Landing was just about perfect at 55 with no flaps.
>
> --------
> Do not archive
>
> Dan Stanton
> 100% Done
> 801, IO360
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154377#154377
>
>
--
John Marzulli
http://701Builder.blogspot.com/
"Flying a plane is no different than riding a bicycle... it's just a lot
harder to put baseball cards in the spokes.
-Airplane The Movie
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: Bending brake for 701 |
> There is no bending required in the main spar,
> however I am building a brake from my own design. My
> brake is for 8 foot lengths. RJS Do not archive.
--- Jerry Hey <jerry@jerryhey.com> wrote:
> <jerry@jerryhey.com>
>
> Hi all, Even though I have had the plans since last
> spring, I am
> just getting started on scratch building a 701. I
> have decided to
> build a brake using Larry McFarland's plans which I
> just ordered
> today. My question is what is the longest piece
> requiring bending in
> the 701? I think it is the main spar which is 3110
> mm (10.2 ft). If
> I am right in this a 10.5 foot brake is required.
> Is this correct?
> Thanks, Jerry
>
>
>
> Click on
> about
> Admin.
>
> browse
> Un/Subscription,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
>
> Forums!
>
>
>
>
>
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
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: Canopy Gas Struts (Springs) |
Thanks,
The point I was trying to make (and doing a poor job) was that based upon my neighbor's
experience, you can't close the cowl if it pops open after takeoff.
Plus I added the Caveat lector, "let the reader beware" about design and checklist...
I've never been in a 601 and I guess I should keep my mouth shut.
:)
Tommy Walker in Alabama
N8701
Do Not Archive
[quote="rsteele(at)rjsit.com"]I think it's worth pointing out that, in fact, even
if the design is flawed, the designer of an experimental aircraft isn't responsible
for the airplane, the builder is. That's why it's an experimental.
It's a responsibility that's all to easy to ignore for us kit
builders, but it's the reality and something we shouldn't forget.
Sounds like there needs to be a checklist item for these latches -
another builder responsibility.
Perhaps we should all test the strut strength before installation.
This is the type of discussion that makes this list so valuable. It
must have been really lonely being a builder before the days of the
internet.
Ron
On Dec 26, 2007, at 10:00 AM, robert stone wrote:
>
>
> Tommy.
> You are right about one thing, the PIC is responsible for
> insuring that the canopy is latched prior to take off. However the
> designer/producer of the aircraft in question is responsible for
> insuring that his design is safe and airworthy and with as many
> reports as I have seen on this forum about canopies opening in
> Bob Stone
> Harker Heights, Tx
> ZodiacXL w/Jabiru 3300
>
> ---
--------
Tommy Walker
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154397#154397
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 |
|
Jay, Ibought a very nice tow bar from larry mcfarland ,see if you can raise
him on this web..... Joe N101HD 601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: Jaybannist@cs.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Tow Bar
>
> Listers:
>
> On the Spruce & Wick's web sites, I see lots of tow bars. No specs. Does
> anyone know what specific model of tow bar will work with the 60XL nose
> gear axle?
>
> Jay in Dallas 601XL N2630J
>
>
>
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: Chris Heintz on VGs |
I just started building and it seems that a lot of people are very polarized on
this issue. I'm not supporting them ether way, but it seems that good information
is the reason for this forum. I am still making up my own mind after all.
This is a great forum and well populated with knowledgeable and good people.
So I posted what I believe is pretty good info, as it is from the Zenith. Strange,
how it is in the 801 section though.
I believe that the slats are the very best way to make this plane set down in a
short area. But like everything it is a compromise. The question everyone should
be asking is do I NEED to land that short and am I capable of it. As long
as Mr Heintz is apparently OK with it from a design standpoint, I say that everyone
should make up their own mind and go with it.
Kevin
--------
Kevin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154409#154409
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 |
|
Very Cool, congrats!
Kevin
--------
Kevin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154411#154411
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 |
|
NIce!! send pictures!!
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: dj45 <dj45@modempool.com>
>Sent: Dec 26, 2007 2:47 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: DEC 26,07
>
>
>I am proud to say that N9801S flew off the board without a single problem!
>Left the ground at about 55 mph and never looked back. All the trims were dead
on. Didn't do a full stall, but did get it slowed down to 40 with no flaps with
just a slight buffeting, no stall.
>All testing went without a hitch.
>Landing was just about perfect at 55 with no flaps.
>
>--------
>Do not archive
>
>Dan Stanton
>100% Done
>801, IO360
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154377#154377
>
>
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bending brake for 701 |
Robert, thanks for the response. Can I assume that since you are
building an 8 foot brake that it is sufficient for any part in the 701?
Jerry
On Dec 26, 2007, at 4:12 PM, ROBERT SCEPPA wrote:
>
>> There is no bending required in the main spar,
>> however I am building a brake from my own design. My
>> brake is for 8 foot lengths. RJS Do not archive.
>
> --- Jerry Hey <jerry@jerryhey.com> wrote:
>
>> <jerry@jerryhey.com>
>>
>> Hi all, Even though I have had the plans since last
>> spring, I am
>> just getting started on scratch building a 701. I
>> have decided to
>> build a brake using Larry McFarland's plans which I
>> just ordered
>> today. My question is what is the longest piece
>> requiring bending in
>> the 701? I think it is the main spar which is 3110
>> mm (10.2 ft). If
>> I am right in this a 10.5 foot brake is required.
>> Is this correct?
>> Thanks, Jerry
>>
>>
>>
>> Click on
>> about
>> Admin.
>>
>> browse
>> Un/Subscription,
>> FAQ,
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
>>
>> Forums!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
>
>
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: Bending brake for 701 |
Jerry,
There's lot to be said about having an 8-foot brake and the utility of
being able to bend nearly everything encountered.
But, I'd recommend that you buy the parts that exceed the 8-foot length
and bend the rest. Much easier and the cost
will still work out better than stretching the brake for a couple of pieces.
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Jerry Hey wrote:
>
> Hi all, Even though I have had the plans since last spring, I am
> just getting started on scratch building a 701. I have decided to
> build a brake using Larry McFarland's plans which I just ordered
> today. My question is what is the longest piece requiring bending in
> the 701? I think it is the main spar which is 3110 mm (10.2 ft). If
> I am right in this a 10.5 foot brake is required. Is this correct?
> Thanks, Jerry
>
>
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 |
|
Jay,
Better than putting a tow bar at the axle, you should consider using a
travel stop and tow bar ring a few inches below the firewall
mounted on the strut. Then use a tow bar on the ring to pull the plane
from a better leverage point for steering.
Also, if your bungee lets go, the travel stop ring will keep your prop
out of the dirt.
On my site, I've free drawings available for making the ring and the tow
bar, or you can order the finished product.
see link,
www.macsmachine.com/html/itemsforsale.htm
Best regards
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
>
> Listers:
>
> On the Spruce & Wick's web sites, I see lots of tow bars. No specs. Does anyone
know what specific model of tow bar will work with the 60XL nose gear axle?
>
> Jay in Dallas 601XL N2630J
>
>
>
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 |
|
Congratulations Dan I'm sure that tops any Christmas gift you could of ever possibly
received...
Fly safe.
Art
--- dj45 <dj45@modempool.com> wrote:
>
> I am proud to say that N9801S flew off the board without a single problem!
> Left the ground at about 55 mph and never looked back. All the trims were dead
on. Didn't do a
> full stall, but did get it slowed down to 40 with no flaps with just a slight
buffeting, no
> stall.
> All testing went without a hitch.
> Landing was just about perfect at 55 with no flaps.
>
> --------
> Do not archive
>
> Dan Stanton
> 100% Done
> 801, IO360
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154377#154377
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bending brake for 701 |
Robert I believe the largest bend in the 701 is the Horizontal Stab spar which
is approximately 7
feet. No bending required for the wing spars as mentioned below.
Art
do not archive
--- ROBERT SCEPPA <rjscep@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > There is no bending required in the main spar,
> > however I am building a brake from my own design. My
> > brake is for 8 foot lengths. RJS Do not archive.
>
> --- Jerry Hey <jerry@jerryhey.com> wrote:
>
> > <jerry@jerryhey.com>
> >
> > Hi all, Even though I have had the plans since last
> > spring, I am
> > just getting started on scratch building a 701. I
> > have decided to
> > build a brake using Larry McFarland's plans which I
> > just ordered
> > today. My question is what is the longest piece
> > requiring bending in
> > the 701? I think it is the main spar which is 3110
> > mm (10.2 ft). If
> > I am right in this a 10.5 foot brake is required.
> > Is this correct?
> > Thanks, Jerry
> >
> >
> >
> > Click on
> > about
> > Admin.
> >
> > browse
> > Un/Subscription,
> > FAQ,
> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
> >
> > Forums!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
>
>
>
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Hi Neighbor:
A great big congratulations Dan, very well done.
Hurry up and get those hours flown off. I can hardly wait for a ride!
George
CH-701 N73EX (Reserved)
do not archive
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Jay,
I got both of these items from Larry and I highly recommend them.
Brian
On my site, I've free drawings available for making the ring and the tow
bar, or you can order the finished product.
see link,
www.macsmachine.com/html/itemsforsale.htm
Best regards
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bending brake for 701 |
Larry, some years ago I built a 52 inch brake with a hydraulic clamp.
It's only limitation is my muscle power. A few days ago, I put a 90
flange on a 30 inch piece of .063 4130. That was close to my
limit. Anyway, I have that brake. If I am to add another the
primary incentive would be to be able to do whatever comes up on the
701. I would not be happy waiting a week or more for a part and I
would be miserable if, after putting a blemish on the long awaited
part, I had to order it again.
I admit to not having studied the plans much. That is why I was
trying to get someone knowledgeable to tell me if the 8 footer is
adequate for everything. I only made a real commitment to building a
couple of days ago after watching the Canyon Surfing video and since
then watching all of the homebuilt help videos. I am going to go
through the plans tonight looking for long bends.
Thanks for offering the Brake plans. From the photos I would say the
design is perfect for our purposes. Jerry
On Dec 26, 2007, at 7:47 PM, LarryMcFarland wrote:
> >
>
> Jerry,
> There's lot to be said about having an 8-foot brake and the utility
> of being able to bend nearly everything encountered.
> But, I'd recommend that you buy the parts that exceed the 8-foot
> length and bend the rest. Much easier and the cost
> will still work out better than stretching the brake for a couple of
> pieces.
>
> Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
>
> Jerry Hey wrote:
>>
>> Hi all, Even though I have had the plans since last spring, I am
>> just getting started on scratch building a 701. I have decided to
>> build a brake using Larry McFarland's plans which I just ordered
>> today. My question is what is the longest piece requiring bending
>> in the 701? I think it is the main spar which is 3110 mm (10.2
>> ft). If I am right in this a 10.5 foot brake is required. Is
>> this correct? Thanks, Jerry
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bending brake for 701 |
Do not archive
"My question is what is the longest piece requiring bending in the 701?"
Working strictly from my diminishing recall, I think the longest parts are
the rear fuselage longerons; 8' x .040" 6061-T6. They were the only parts,
due to thickness, that I couldn't bend on my Tapco aluminum siding brake
(.032" max thickness). Now there are .062 brackets etc. that can be bent in
a vise, they are all short and require a larger radius that the usual sheet
metal in the brake.
Regards,
Randy, Las Vegas
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Prop Bolt Patterns |
This PRSU has 12 holes. It appears that I have been measuring the same two
holes every time and I must have done it at least ten times. I happened
to measure again today and low and behold this set of holes was not the same
as the other ten sets. They were 4". What a deal. You sure can't tell
the difference just by looking. The old boy that built it was smarter than I
gave him credit for, he drilled for both sets. Since I didn't buy it
directly from the him, I didn't know. But I did wonder why he put 12 holes
in it. Take care, LRM.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Fothergill" <mfothergill@sympatico.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Prop Bolt Patterns
> <mfothergill@sympatico.ca>
>
> Hi;
> The "old" 912s had the 100mm bolt circle. New 912s have a 4 inch or 101.6
> dia bolt circle. The bolts are still 8 mm.
> Mike
> CH601HDS 1200+ hrs
> UHS Spinners
>
> LRM wrote:
>> The bolt pattern for my new PRSU measures out to be 100mm with 6 3/8"
>> bolts. That is supposed to be the large Rotax, right? Now I am confused
>> because I called Powerfin about a new prop. They said "no it's a 4" or
>> 101,6mm pattern". Well, I can read a caliber unless it's Miller time. I
>> have four calipers, they all lie at times. So I argued with the guy. He
>> almost convinced me my PRSU was drilled wrong. He wasn't that convincing
>> because I didn't buy a prop, yet. I had an old spacer plate for an
>> SAE-1. Just for fun, I put it in the end mill and drilled a 4" pattern
>> in between the 4 3/8" pattern. Took it over to the PRSU and of course it
>> was too big by about 1.6mm. I knew it would be, but seeing is believing,
>> plus it was scrap anyway.
>>
>> I am still confused, Culver says it a large 100mm Rotax. Powerfin says
>> they would have to drill a special prop hub for me because the large
>> Rotax is 4". Are there two large Rotax patterns? It wouldn't surprise
>> me. Everybody knows more about this stuff than I do, so someone please
>> straighten me out. Does anyone know where I can find a chart of all the
>> different small bolt patterns for our type of engines?
>>
>> Building cars was less confusing and a whole lot cheaper.
>>
>> LRM, www.skyhawg.com <http://www.skyhawg.com>
>
>
> --
> 269.17.9/1198 - Release Date: 12/26/2007 5:26 PM
>
>
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Too KOOL, another 801 breaks the bonds of gravity and what a great chris
tmas present for you.....
A BIG congrats to you...... And remember, an experimental plane is "neve
r" 100% done... :<)
do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
-- "dj45" <dj45@modempool.com> wrote:
I am proud to say that N9801S flew off the board without a single proble
m!
Left the ground at about 55 mph and never looked back. All the trims wer
e dead on. Didn't do a full stall, but did get it slowed down to 40 with
no flaps with just a slight buffeting, no stall.
All testing went without a hitch.
Landing was just about perfect at 55 with no flaps.
--------
Do not archive
Dan Stanton
100% Done
801, IO360
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=154377#154377
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
_____________________________________________________________
Put your loved ones in good hands with quality senior assisted living. C
lick now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4uA6cvAmPMG1NkAuUqk
tIOLE79bOuZC153mUv5yubSRaZpQO/
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bending brake for 701 |
On Dec 26, 2007, at 7:47 PM, LarryMcFarland wrote:
> >
>
> Jerry,
> There's lot to be said about having an 8-foot brake and the utility
> of being able to bend nearly everything encountered.
> But, I'd recommend that you buy the parts that exceed the 8-foot
> length and bend the rest. Much easier and the cost
> will still work out better than stretching the brake for a couple of
> pieces.
>
> Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
>
> Jerry Hey wrote:
>>
>> Hi all, Even though I have had the plans since last spring, I am
>> just getting started on scratch building a 701. I have decided to
>> build a brake using Larry McFarland's plans which I just ordered
>> today. My question is what is the longest piece requiring bending
>> in the 701? I think it is the main spar which is 3110 mm (10.2
>> ft). If I am right in this a 10.5 foot brake is required. Is
>> this correct? Thanks, Jerry
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
That's great news, fly safe.
--------
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=154471#154471
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! --
|