Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:33 AM - Clarification of the Ocala crank replacement (Aerolitellc@aol.com)
2. 04:49 AM - Re: Now that's STOL! (n801bh@netzero.com)
3. 06:22 AM - Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Gig Giacona)
4. 06:47 AM - Re: test flight (Gig Giacona)
5. 06:48 AM - Re: Re: ethanol in auto gas (Don Mountain)
6. 06:52 AM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (cookwithgas)
7. 06:52 AM - ethanol in autogas (Joe Spencer)
8. 07:21 AM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Kevin L. Rupert)
9. 07:38 AM - Re: Now that's STOL! (James Sagerser)
10. 07:38 AM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Gig Giacona)
11. 07:44 AM - Re: ethanol in autogas (Dennis Shoup)
12. 07:51 AM - Re: Clarification of the Ocala crank replacement (Ben52425@aol.com)
13. 08:00 AM - Re: Re: ethanol in auto gas (LRM)
14. 08:08 AM - Re: Re: test flight (Jaybannist@cs.com)
15. 08:10 AM - Re: ethanol in autogas (Gig Giacona)
16. 08:13 AM - Re: Re: ethanol in auto gas (Jaybannist@cs.com)
17. 08:23 AM - Re: Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Kevin L. Rupert)
18. 08:23 AM - Re: ethanol in autogas (MacDonald Doug)
19. 08:25 AM - Re: ethanol in autogas (LarryMcFarland)
20. 08:41 AM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Bill Berle)
21. 08:58 AM - Re: test flight (Bill Berle)
22. 09:14 AM - Re: ethanol in autogas (moorecomp)
23. 09:19 AM - Re: ethanol in autogas (Russell J.)
24. 09:24 AM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Bill Berle)
25. 09:36 AM - Re: ethanol in autogas (Craig Payne)
26. 09:57 AM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Gig Giacona)
27. 10:53 AM - Re: Part Stoutness (dkandle)
28. 11:05 AM - Adding an opening window on a 701 (dkandle)
29. 11:18 AM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Bob Sturgis)
30. 11:48 AM - 914 cowling (Tracy)
31. 12:00 PM - Re: test flight (dj45)
32. 12:14 PM - Re: Flight report & question-701 (dkandle)
33. 12:21 PM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Juan Vega)
34. 12:27 PM - Re: Re: test flight (Aerolitellc@aol.com)
35. 12:37 PM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (chris Sinfield)
36. 12:58 PM - Re: test flight (Gig Giacona)
37. 01:11 PM - Re: Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Juan Vega)
38. 01:21 PM - Re: Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (Bryan Martin)
39. 01:21 PM - Re: Sleeves on cable (Zed Smith)
40. 02:17 PM - Re: Re: Sleeves on cable (Graeme)
41. 02:26 PM - Re: Forming blocks - a 'right of passage"??? (Jugle)
42. 02:52 PM - Re: test flight (dj45)
43. 03:10 PM - Re: Adding an opening window on a 701 (Keith Ashcraft)
44. 03:44 PM - Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? (John Bolding)
45. 04:15 PM - Test flight (Bill Naumuk)
46. 04:29 PM - Re: test flight (Tim Juhl)
47. 04:38 PM - Re: test flight (Tim Juhl)
48. 05:19 PM - Aileron Fit (ashontz)
49. 06:34 PM - Re: Forming blocks - a 'right of passage"??? (Kevin Bonds)
50. 07:14 PM - Re: Re: Flight report & question-701 (Les Goldner)
51. 07:34 PM - Flying a 701 without doors (Les Goldner)
52. 08:07 PM - Re: Flying a 701 without doors (billmileski)
53. 08:07 PM - Re: ethanol in autogas (Don Mountain)
54. 08:16 PM - XCOM radio and seperate intercom (Mark Colbeck)
55. 08:43 PM - Re: XCOM radio and seperate intercom (steve)
56. 08:44 PM - Spinner with Cooling Fins (James Sagerser)
57. 08:46 PM - Re: Aileron Fit (Ron Lendon)
58. 08:59 PM - Re: Aileron Fit (Terry Phillips)
59. 09:07 PM - Re: Aileron Fit (Terry Phillips)
60. 11:03 PM - Re: Adding an opening window on a 701 (sonar1@cox.net)
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: | Clarification of the Ocala crank replacement |
In the interest of the Corvair aircraft engine community and the integrity
of the information on this list I need to clarify =9Ccase three
=9D of the WW
crank update, Part #1.
I, too, am very concerned with the most serious challenge facing the Corvai
r
engine, crankshaft breakage. This problem has led me to investigate better
ways to improve the crankshaft=99s durability through improved prepara
tion and
nitriding as well as possible sources of new crankshafts incorporating chan
ges
to reduce the transmission of prop forces.
The circumstances of =9Ccase three=9D follow.
The very first attempt to start the engine resulted in the cylinders firing
totally out of sequence because of a misinterpretation of the spark plug
wiring as described in the green Corvair Chassis Shop Manual. My second atte
mpt
that same day was even more disastrous, with a large backfire occurring thro
ugh
the intake. It was at this time that damage occurred to the engine. Spark
plug wiring resolved, the engine fired smoothly but was exhibiting blow by.
A
compression check showed the #2 cylinder with very little compression, and
upon further examination, a crushed ring was found. Replacement of the ring
s of
#2 cylinder was attempted, but a crushed skirt on the piston made the entir
e
piston replacement necessary.
It is obvious to me that the violent counteracting forces the engine
experienced at this time started the crack in the crankshaft, and possibly t
he
beginning of the crack in the case as well. Mr. Bradner=99s aircraft f
unctioned
smoothly until he began to notice a vibration on a trip between his home in
Ohio
and his Florida residence. The trip encountered bad weather and terminated
in Ocala when the vibration became very pronounced. It is probable that th
e
breakage occurred at WOT on takeoff from his prior stop for fuel, Waycross,
GA. Ben contacted me upon landing in Ocala and after our discussion, I drov
e
down from Louisville, KY, to Ocala where the plane was temporarily hangared
with enough parts to build another engine while Ben continued his return to
his
Florida residence by car. Inspection of the engine showed oil leakage and
prop movement. Complete disassembly of the engine revealed the broken crank
and
a hole in the case above the #6 cylinder. I have pictures of the case and
crank and have been promised return of the crank by Mr. Wynne after a compl
ete
examination and analysis by Embry-Riddle. I retained the broken case. Caref
ul
inspection of all pistons by Mr. Wynne and me revealed no signs of on-going
detonation, and the only parts of the engine requiring replacement were the
broken crankshaft and the engine case. The obvious misunderstanding regardi
ng
timing marks was because I use a digital timing light which only uses the
=980=99
degree TDC mark as all other settings are electronically adjusted for withi
n
the timing light allowing it to use only the =980=99 degree mar
k. This engine
did not operate outside of the timing that William Wynne=99s Engine m
anual
states and was built completely with parts from William Wynne and his desig
nated
suppliers.
The bottom line is that this crank failure cannot be attributed to unusual
engine timings but to its initial startup with incorrect engine firing
sequence and therefore should not be counted as a crankshaft failure, at lea
st not a
normal or unexplained crankshaft breakage. The crankshaft damage started
with the abnormal forces it experienced at the time of the #2 piston damage
that
caused its replacement.
It does, however, accentuate the need for crank examination when a problem
of this nature or a prop strike is experienced.
Mr. Bradner had flown his 601 for approximately 105 hours before his landin
g
at Ocala and has flown an additional 50 hours since the replacement of the
crank and engine case. I think that he should be commended for his recognit
ion
of the vibration and the subsequent abrupt ending of his flight plan to
Bradenton. It would seem to me he demonstrated the same good judgment that
Chris
did in case #2, and his flight was not just for pleasure or for performance
checks, but had a specific destination /time schedule need that he over rod
e
to investigate the vibration experienced after takeoff from Waycross, GA..
As a matter of record, the only personnel contacted for advice/consultation
during the build were William Wynne=99s trusted mechanic and test pil
ot, Gus,
and our supplier of reworked heads. I did not, do not, use engine advice f
rom
unknowledgeable, unproven individuals where the Corvair engine is concerned
,
and I have flown in Mr. Bradner=99s Corvair powered 601 as well as 0-
235
powered 601s, and quite frankly, prefer the smoothness of the Corvair and i
ts
lighter weight/better weight distribution within the 601 airframe..
As a result of the crank problem, I have learned that the haste I exhibited
and the pressures I felt trying to make up for a two month delay caused by
Fire Wall Forward parts unavailability caused costly mistakes, and that my
delivery commitment to a customer can not be allowed to affect work quality
. I
intend to always have spare parts/engines available in any future endeavors
to
remedy any unexpected difficulties I might encounter.
I hope this answers any questions regarding this specific broken crank
incident and satisfies my obligation to the Corvair community of thorough,
factual
reporting on those occurrences that can impact all of us.
Aerolitellc, Jeff Garrett
**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
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: Now that's STOL! |
I viewed that video several times and I will say that it is quite impres
sive. I looked closely and didn't see a windsock to determine windspeed.
You can clearly hear the wind whistling in the camcorders mic though. W
ith a 25 knot headwind, about any well flown bush plane can do some amaz
ing things.
do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
-- Walter Yankauskas <w@waltery.com> wrote:
That video was from last year's Valdez May day Fly-In.
http://www.valdezalaska.org/events/flyIn/flyIn.html
The plane taking off is the Cub Crafters "Carbon Cub", it's best take
off was 19 feet with a best landing of 53 feet. In front of hundreds of
people on a marked and measured taxiway.
Bill Wilcox had an 88 foot takeoff in his 801, then he went back to his
hangar and took the leading edge slats off and wanted another try, but
the judges didn't feel that it was appropriate for one of the guys
running the contest to make multiple runs in different configurations.
Walter
Anchorage, AK - Tri-Pacer, 701 kit
Craig Payne wrote:
om>
>
> Undated Alaskan STOL competition.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWDEYpqS0yw
>
> -- Craig
>
>
>
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
_____________________________________________________________
Become a Dental Assistant and earn up to $50/ hour. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4vHFNSveApFsKgha8Dw
UXL08xPLeUaLuii6HMj5qx8U58VVw/
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: | Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
I ordered some extra Nico sleeves from ACS and instead of the zinc plated ones
they sent copper sleeves.
Are these an acceptable replacement or do I need to send these back?
--------
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=161051#161051
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 |
|
I'm a little confused by your phrasing here Bill. When you don't say, "The shakedown
hours need not count towards the 40 "Fly Off" hours..." It sounds like
you think if you don't call it Phase One flight it isn't. That isn't the case.
It's a Phase One flight until you have flown off the hours and have entered
Phase Two. And the regulations are pretty clear that in order to have a second
pilot in the aircraft during Phase One it has to be approved by the FAA and in
the operating limitations.
The fact that the test pilot is a CFI isn't really at issue. If he is a smart CFI
he isn't going to risk his certificates doing something that, if caught, would
certainly lead to some level of FAA action against him.
I don't know where you live but if there is another 601 anywhere near by you could
get some dual with him in it and he could also use this time to layout any
handling differences in your plane and the one you get dual in.
naumuk(at)alltel.net wrote:
> All-
> None of the recent posts reflects my intent. The shakedown hours need not
count towards the 40 "Fly Off" hours, and the test pilot I spoke of is a CFII.
> To keep it short, I intend to do whatever is necessary and legal to give
me the best chance of flying my project safely.
> Bill
>
--------
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=161059#161059
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: ethanol in auto gas |
I don't believe I would place much credibility in this newspaper article about
alcohol in auto fuel. The writer is much prejudiced toward his oil company's
associations with alcohol suppliers. Our Omaha EAA chapter recently toured through
an aircraft engine re-builder that was working on crop duster Lycoming IO-540's
that had more than 3000 hours on them from Brazil, South America. And
all of those hours were flown with 100% alcohol. We were told they were the
cleanest and showing the least wear of any engines they had seen with that many
hours on them. Also its common in the United States for oval track car races
to run pure alcohol. Alcohol runs cooler than gasoline, so it has advantages
in both racing engines and aircraft engines that fly in hot weather. And there
are several demonstration airplanes flying in this country on pure alcohol.
The 10% alcohol won't hurt your aircraft engine. But you just need to be aware
of and alcohol proof your system. Carburetor
seals, gaskets and floats need to be alcohol proof. Fuel lines and gas tank coatings
need to be alcohol proof. Carburetor jets need to have the adjustment
range to handle a correct mixture. Water needs to be drained out of the system
regularly. And vapor pressure needs to be considered when flying in high altitudes
or hot days.
And for the writer's information about burning "in excess of one gallon of fossil
fuel for each gallon of alcohol produced" is a bunch of bunk. It would be
foolish to think that we would in effect for each gallon of alcohol we bought
we would also be paying for one gallon of fossil fuel, along with the costs of
production, paying for the construction of the alcohol plant, transportation,
production of the grains to feed the plant, and etc. It sounds like someone
is investing $5 for every $1 in product that is coming out of the plant. I doubt
it.
Don Mountain
Ron DeWees <rdewees@mindspring.com> wrote: Sad but informative. Those of
us using auto fuel in our airplane motors now have to consider many additional
problems that alcohol causes and it's not even good for cars! This was published
today in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and written by the CEO of a petroleum
distributor in Atlanta. Who is pushing ethanol? It's apparently not petroleum
companies.
Ron
Controversial ethanol being forced on us
By Tex Pitfield
For the Journal-Constitution
Published on: 01/28/08 In the next month or so, you will possibly notice
that when you buy gasoline for your vehicle, the dispenser will be freshly labeled
"may contain ethanol."
In fact, over the next several months, the majority of gasoline in the greater
Atlanta area and in time the entire state will contain approximately 10 percent
ethanol. This is being introduced by Georgia Department of Agriculture as
a "voluntary" measure. While voluntary to the petroleum companies, it is far
from "voluntary" for the general consumer.
Inevitably, by spring, all gas you buy will be ethanol-bearing.
You will have no choice, simply because the big oil companies that distribute
the fuel for all the major brands will be mixing ethanol into their gasoline.
Ethanol producers receive a 51-cent per gallon federal subsidy. Just remember
that the subsidy comes out of your pocket.
You may think ethanol is a good thing and you are helping the nation wean itself
off dependency on foreign oil. You could not be more mistaken.
To make 1 gallon of corn-based ethanol, you need in excess of a gallon of fossil
fuel by some estimates. Other forms of ethanol, such as from wood chips and
grass, require even more fossil fuel. Sugar beets and sugar cane ethanol require
slightly less fuel.
That does not apparently include the cost of the fuel to transport the finished
product by rail or truck. Unlike gasoline, ethanol cannot be transported by
pipeline since it picks up and retains water, rendering it unusable.
Now here is where it gets really interesting. Ethanol requires in excess of
3 gallons of water to be produced. Refining crude oil to make gasoline takes maybe
a gallon of water.
In a time when the entire country for the most part is starving for water, we
are wasting it to make an alternative fuel? Again, this logic has been unattainable.
And if there were not enough black marks regarding ethanol already, we are now
realizing that ethanol poses a disaster for the already sensitive environment.
Ethanol fuel produces far more harmful fumes and pollutants, namely nitrous
oxides, than regular fossil fuel. So the air we breathe gets worse, all in the
effort to reduce dependency on foreign oil.
You will also see a number of reports from environmental agencies, most in Europe
and countries more aware of these issues than the United States, stating
that the environmental impact of ethanol far outweighs any benefit it might possibly
offer: loss of water, more pollutants onto the farm land and the devastation
of forest for corn production.
And if that was not enough, we in the transportation business have witnessed
supply interruptions and logistical backlogs. For an infrastructure that is quickly
becoming reliant on a questionable entity, there are a grave number of
concerns that together create a potential calamity.
The mileage in your car will suffer from ethanol usage, although that number
is debated. A 10 percent mixture of ethanol and 90 percent gasoline is reported
to reduce a vehicle's mileage by at least 5 percent, perhaps 10 percent or
more. Your car will not run as well.
All these shortfalls are well known by the federal and state government, but
lobbyists and various corporate entities who always seem to act in our best interests
(read: adjustable mortgage rates, artificially low interest rates etc.)
have deemed that this is something we need.
Regrettably, once again, there appears to be little thought to the long-term
results, only the short-term questionable gain, and again, it is likely that
our elected officials are oblivious to the ramifications that their cash-driven,
poorly thought out decisions will result in in the very near future.
Fossil fuel as an energy source will not be going away in the foreseeable future,
of that we can be certain.
Realize that we the fuel carriers, the distributors, and many others do not
want nor support ethanol. It makes our cost of doing business increase, is difficult
to handle and the changeover is expensive. And we do not make more money
with it.
I addressed these very same issues recently with Tommy Irvin, commissioner of
the Georgia Department of Agriculture. Again, it is a "voluntary change," I
was told.
And I mentioned to him that there are numerous alternative energy systems on
the design table and already in production: electric cars, hydrogen fuel cells,
that have merit and potential. Regrettably, perhaps my foresight is not the
same as his.
> Tex Pitfield is president and CEO of Saraguay Petroleum in Atlanta.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Hey Gig:
If I remember correctly you want to use the zinc-plated sleeves with stainless
steel cable. With galvanized cable, the copper sleeves are fine. I remember
reading this in the Aircraft Spruce catalog a while back - you might want to call
them and make sure. 877-477-7823
I hope this helps.
Scott Laughlin
www.cooknwithgas.com
601XL/Corvair Finished & Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161062#161062
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: | ethanol in autogas |
Anybody know how the 912s likes autofuel with ethanol in it? For all the
info that Rotax sends out on their engines I don't remember seeing
anything on this subject from them. Anyody got a link or info?
Thx Joe
Sad but informative. Those of us using auto fuel in our airplane motors
now have to consider many additional problems that alcohol causes and
it's not even good for cars! This was published today in the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution and written by the CEO of a petroleum distributor
in Atlanta. Who is pushing ethanol? It's apparently not petroleum
companies.
Ron
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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Gig,
Plated sleeves (Tin Or Zinc) are required on stainless cables due to
electrolysis caused by different types of metals.
Plain copper is used on galvanized cable.
Kevin Rupert
601XL TD/ Corvair
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: Now that's STOL! |
I wonder how much headwind he had.. You could hear it in the mic.
do no archive
On Jan 29, 2008, at 12:50 AM, Walter Yankauskas wrote:
>
> That video was from last year's Valdez May day Fly-In.
>
> http://www.valdezalaska.org/events/flyIn/flyIn.html
>
> The plane taking off is the Cub Crafters "Carbon Cub", it's best
> take off was 19 feet with a best landing of 53 feet. In front of
> hundreds of people on a marked and measured taxiway.
>
> Bill Wilcox had an 88 foot takeoff in his 801, then he went back to
> his hangar and took the leading edge slats off and wanted another
> try, but the judges didn't feel that it was appropriate for one of
> the guys running the contest to make multiple runs in different
> configurations.
>
> Walter
> Anchorage, AK - Tri-Pacer, 701 kit
>
> Craig Payne wrote:
>> <craig@craigandjean.com>
>>
>> Undated Alaskan STOL competition.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWDEYpqS0yw
>>
>> -- Craig
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Thanks guys. Back to ACS they go.
--------
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=161073#161073
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: ethanol in autogas |
I recall reading a year ago that Rotax prohibits the use of ethanol
bearing fuel. Ethanol goes back to the 80's it when was called gasohol and
car many car manufacturers warned against using it because of deterioration
of engine seals and rubber parts.
Ethanol results in poorer fuel consumption according to several
automotive publications tests. For us that means reduced range and
endurance since larger fuel tanks and greater weight aren't a very good
choice for us. Those same reports also mention the cost of ethanol
production being higher than gasoline. It is only profitable because of
Federal subsidies. The car manufacturers also receive Federal subsidies for
producing alternate fuel vehicles and ethanol is the only immediately
available alternate. Farmers enjoy higher corn prices as well. The
consumer pays for all of the subsidies as well as higher prices for corn and
beef which is fed with more expensive corn.
The government is taking care of us again.
Dennis
On Jan 29, 2008 9:44 AM, Joe Spencer <jpspencer@cableone.net> wrote:
> Anybody know how the 912s likes autofuel with ethanol in it? For all the
> info that Rotax sends out on their engines I don't remember seeing anything
> on this subject from them. Anyody got a link or info?
>
> Thx Joe
>
> Sad but informative. Those of us using auto fuel in our airplane motors
> now have to consider many additional problems that alcohol causes and
> it's not even good for cars! This was published today in the Atlanta
> Journal-Constitution and written by the CEO of a petroleum distributor
> in Atlanta. Who is pushing ethanol? It's apparently not petroleum
> companies.
> Ron
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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: Clarification of the Ocala crank replacement |
HI GROUP
I FLEW MY PLANE FROM OHIO TO OCOLA FL. WITH NO ENGINE PROBLEM
EXCEPT FOR A OIL LEAK I COULD,T FINE AT THAT TIME LANDED AT OCOLA
TOOK OF AFTER FUELING UP . ON DOWNWIND LEG LOST POWER LANDED
AND GROUNDED THE PLANE.
CALLED JEFF AND HE CAME TO THE RESCUE
THE REST YOU READ IN JEFF,S STATEMENT
WHAT I,M TRYING TO SAY IS THE ENGINE RAN GREAT TILL TAKE OFF
AT OCOLA
PILOT AND OWNER BEN
N524B
**************
Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
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: | Re: ethanol in auto gas |
The one issue that is a major concern is the effect alcohol has on
fiberglass fuel tanks. Several aircraft I know of use fiberglass tanks,
i.e., RAF-2000s and both of mine. Probably a bunch more I don't know
about. Alcohol will soften and devolve the resin. I used Isophthalic
resin which is chemical resistant, gas does not phase it, but alcohol
will. I once put 1 pint of dry gas in a tank and the gas immediately
turned milky. I open the tank and found the inner layer of the resin
was soft. That is the main reason I no longer make and sell fiberglass
tanks. And, that's a fact. LRM skyhawg.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Mountain
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: ethanol in auto gas
I don't believe I would place much credibility in this newspaper
article about alcohol in auto fuel. The writer is much prejudiced
toward his oil company's associations with alcohol suppliers. Our Omaha
EAA chapter recently toured through an aircraft engine re-builder that
was working on crop duster Lycoming IO-540's that had more than 3000
hours on them from Brazil, South America. And all of those hours were
flown with 100% alcohol. We were told they were the cleanest and
showing the least wear of any engines they had seen with that many hours
on them. Also its common in the United States for oval track car races
to run pure alcohol. Alcohol runs cooler than gasoline, so it has
advantages in both racing engines and aircraft engines that fly in hot
weather. And there are several demonstration airplanes flying in this
country on pure alcohol. The 10% alcohol won't hurt your aircraft
engine. But you just need to be aware of and alcohol proof your system.
Carburetor seals, gaskets and floats need to be alcohol proof. Fuel
lines and gas tank coatings need to be alcohol proof. Carburetor jets
need to have the adjustment range to handle a correct mixture. Water
needs to be drained out of the system regularly. And vapor pressure
needs to be considered when flying in high altitudes or hot days.
And for the writer's information about burning "in excess of one
gallon of fossil fuel for each gallon of alcohol produced" is a bunch of
bunk. It would be foolish to think that we would in effect for each
gallon of alcohol we bought we would also be paying for one gallon of
fossil fuel, along with the costs of production, paying for the
construction of the alcohol plant, transportation, production of the
grains to feed the plant, and etc. It sounds like someone is investing
$5 for every $1 in product that is coming out of the plant. I doubt it.
Don Mountain
Ron DeWees <rdewees@mindspring.com> wrote:
Sad but informative. Those of us using auto fuel in our airplane
motors now have to consider many additional problems that alcohol causes
and it's not even good for cars! This was published today in the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution and written by the CEO of a petroleum distributor
in Atlanta. Who is pushing ethanol? It's apparently not petroleum
companies.
Ron
Controversial ethanol being forced on us
By Tex Pitfield
For the Journal-Constitution
Published on: 01/28/08
In the next month or so, you will possibly notice that when you
buy gasoline for your vehicle, the dispenser will be freshly labeled
"may contain ethanol."
In fact, over the next several months, the majority of gasoline in
the greater Atlanta area and in time the entire state will contain
approximately 10 percent ethanol. This is being introduced by Georgia
Department of Agriculture as a "voluntary" measure. While voluntary to
the petroleum companies, it is far from "voluntary" for the general
consumer.
Inevitably, by spring, all gas you buy will be ethanol-bearing.
You will have no choice, simply because the big oil companies that
distribute the fuel for all the major brands will be mixing ethanol into
their gasoline. Ethanol producers receive a 51-cent per gallon federal
subsidy. Just remember that the subsidy comes out of your pocket.
You may think ethanol is a good thing and you are helping the
nation wean itself off dependency on foreign oil. You could not be more
mistaken.
To make 1 gallon of corn-based ethanol, you need in excess of a
gallon of fossil fuel by some estimates. Other forms of ethanol, such as
from wood chips and grass, require even more fossil fuel. Sugar beets
and sugar cane ethanol require slightly less fuel.
That does not apparently include the cost of the fuel to transport
the finished product by rail or truck. Unlike gasoline, ethanol cannot
be transported by pipeline since it picks up and retains water,
rendering it unusable.
Now here is where it gets really interesting. Ethanol requires in
excess of 3 gallons of water to be produced. Refining crude oil to make
gasoline takes maybe a gallon of water.
In a time when the entire country for the most part is starving
for water, we are wasting it to make an alternative fuel? Again, this
logic has been unattainable.
And if there were not enough black marks regarding ethanol
already, we are now realizing that ethanol poses a disaster for the
already sensitive environment. Ethanol fuel produces far more harmful
fumes and pollutants, namely nitrous oxides, than regular fossil fuel.
So the air we breathe gets worse, all in the effort to reduce dependency
on foreign oil.
You will also see a number of reports from environmental agencies,
most in Europe and countries more aware of these issues than the United
States, stating that the environmental impact of ethanol far outweighs
any benefit it might possibly offer: loss of water, more pollutants onto
the farm land and the devastation of forest for corn production.
And if that was not enough, we in the transportation business have
witnessed supply interruptions and logistical backlogs. For an
infrastructure that is quickly becoming reliant on a questionable
entity, there are a grave number of concerns that together create a
potential calamity.
The mileage in your car will suffer from ethanol usage, although
that number is debated. A 10 percent mixture of ethanol and 90 percent
gasoline is reported to reduce a vehicle's mileage by at least 5
percent, perhaps 10 percent or more. Your car will not run as well.
All these shortfalls are well known by the federal and state
government, but lobbyists and various corporate entities who always seem
to act in our best interests (read: adjustable mortgage rates,
artificially low interest rates etc.) have deemed that this is something
we need.
Regrettably, once again, there appears to be little thought to the
long-term results, only the short-term questionable gain, and again, it
is likely that our elected officials are oblivious to the ramifications
that their cash-driven, poorly thought out decisions will result in in
the very near future.
Fossil fuel as an energy source will not be going away in the
foreseeable future, of that we can be certain.
Realize that we the fuel carriers, the distributors, and many
others do not want nor support ethanol. It makes our cost of doing
business increase, is difficult to handle and the changeover is
expensive. And we do not make more money with it.
I addressed these very same issues recently with Tommy Irvin,
commissioner of the Georgia Department of Agriculture. Again, it is a
"voluntary change," I was told.
And I mentioned to him that there are numerous alternative energy
systems on the design table and already in production: electric cars,
hydrogen fuel cells,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
1/28/2008 10:59 AM
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 |
|
I agree. The 40-hour "fly-off" IS the shakedown, not a different phase. "Fly-off"
or "shakedown", which ever your want to call it, starts when the wheels first
leave the ground. The FAA wants to make sure your "homemade" contraption is
safe to fly before you risk the life of an innocent passenger. Making exceptions
invites abuse of the policy. That said, I do believe the FAA should be realistic
about allowing another person aboard who is not just a passenger, but
an actual co-pilot, technical adviser or really essential helper. I fully expect
to appeal to them for such an exception during my 40 hours of flight testing.
Jay in Dallas 601XL N2630J "Lil Bruiser"
"Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>
>I'm a little confused by your phrasing here Bill. When you don't say, "The shakedown
hours need not count towards the 40 "Fly Off" hours..." It sounds like
you think if you don't call it Phase One flight it isn't. That isn't the case.
It's a Phase One flight until you have flown off the hours and have entered
Phase Two. And the regulations are pretty clear that in order to have a second
pilot in the aircraft during Phase One it has to be approved by the FAA and
in the operating limitations.
>
>The fact that the test pilot is a CFI isn't really at issue. If he is a smart
CFI he isn't going to risk his certificates doing something that, if caught, would
certainly lead to some level of FAA action against him.
>
>I don't know where you live but if there is another 601 anywhere near by you could
get some dual with him in it and he could also use this time to layout any
handling differences in your plane and the one you get dual in.
>
>
>naumuk(at)alltel.net wrote:
>> All-
>> None of the recent posts reflects my intent. The shakedown hours need
not count towards the 40 "Fly Off" hours, and the test pilot I spoke of is a
CFII.
>> To keep it short, I intend to do whatever is necessary and legal to give
me the best chance of flying my project safely.
>> Bill
>>
>
>
>--------
>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=161059#161059
>
>
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: ethanol in autogas |
The problem with autogas is that you never really know what is in it. We had a
local problem that lasted for over a year.
It all started when almost everyone that drove a GMC or Chevy truck, Tahoe or Suburban
had their fuel pump fail. And then fail again. And again. Since almost
all of these were happening on 2 model years and they were current model years
they were under warranty and finally GM had the dealerships start sending in
the pumps. They found that some non-metal piece was failing but couldn't figure
out why because it was only happening in this area.
Then they started having samples of the fuel in the failed trucks sent in to be
tested. What they found was that the chemistry on the gas was, to quote a guy
at the Chevy dealer I know, "Really F*&^ed up."
See, there is one refinery here and virtually all fuel here comes from that one
refinery. It doesn't matter if it is Connoco, Exxon or no name.
GM threatened to sue for damages the refinery wrote a check out of court and fixed
the problem.
I was told by a refinery engineer that the reports showed that if this part was
submerged in this fuel mix for more than 2 months it would fail 95% of the time.
If it was in there for 5 months the failure rate approached 100%.
The moral of this story is there are reasons that 100LL avgas costs what it does.
--------
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=161085#161085
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: ethanol in auto gas |
In other words, it won't hurt your engine, just nearly EVERYTHING else in the fuel
system. I'm really relieved! ;-D
Jay in Dallas
Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com> wrote:
.... The 10% alcohol won't hurt your aircraft engine. But you just need to be
aware of and alcohol proof your system. Carburetor
> seals, gaskets and floats need to be alcohol proof. Fuel lines and gas tank
coatings need to be alcohol proof. Carburetor jets need to have the adjustment
range to handle a correct mixture. Water needs to be drained out of the system
regularly. And vapor pressure needs to be considered when flying in high
altitudes or hot days.
>
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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Gig,
From that, I take it you are using Stainless Steel cable. You might
find this interesting:
> General aviation aircraft generally use control cable made from either
> stainless steel or galvanized steel. Each type has its advantages and
> disadvantages. Generally,
>
> Galvanized rope is stronger
> Galvanized rope has less wear
> Galvanized rope is easier to inspect for corrosion damage
>
> Stainless steel is more corrosion resistant
> Stainless steel has considerably less service life due to high wear
> Stainless steel cannot be inspected for corrosion damag
>
> The poor wear resistance of stainless steel rope has resulted in
> aircraft control problems. More frequent inspections are required. For
> more information on this subject reference: Special Airworthiness
> Information Bulletin: SAIB CE-01-30, July 11, 2001. Frayed stainless
> steel control cable is suspect in a Twin Otter crash killing 14
> passangers in Tahiti in August of 2007.
>
> There are several reasons why stainless wears more than galvanized
> steel when used on flight controls:
> Galvanizing is a natural lubricant. For example, galvanized threads
> have a lower friction (K) factor then plain steel. The individual
> wires can easily move about with very little friction and wear.
> Stainless steel on the other hand has high friction and has a
> reputation for seizing and galling when rubbed together. Every time
> the wire rope is flexed, the stainless wires rub together. High
> friction creates high wear.
>
> Wear resistance can be increased by changing how the wire stands are
> wound. In the picture above the individual wires are horizontal
> (parallel to the axis of the rope). This is called "right regular lay"
> and is the standard lay.
>
> Another method of winding the wire stands is so that they form an
> angle to the axis of the rope. This is called "lang lay". Lang lay
> increases fatigue strength and abrasion resistance without any
> decrease in ultimate strength.
>
> Another method of changing the wire characteristics of fatigue
> strength,. abrasion resistance, and flexibility is to use wires of
> different diameters. For example, Douglas Specification DMS2192 calls
> for a Warrington Seal (IWRC) construction. This type of wire rope has
> larger wires on the outside and and smaller wires on the inside.
>
> There are other wire rope designs that the engineer can call for to
> optimize specific performance goals. This is why when we replace wire
> rope we should make sure that the replacement meets the original
> manufacturer's specifications.
Kevin Rupert
601XL TD/ Corvair
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: ethanol in autogas |
Actually, if I remember correctly, Rotax allows up to
5% Ethanol. Of course, that doesn't help us much
considering that most Ethanol laced fuels are at least
10% in North America.
Doug MacDonald
NW Ontario, Canada
CH-701 Scratch Builder
--- Dennis Shoup <zenith601xl@gmail.com> wrote:
> I recall reading a year ago that Rotax
> prohibits the use of ethanol
> bearing fuel. Ethanol goes back to the 80's it when
> was called gasohol and
> car many car manufacturers warned against using it
> because of deterioration
> of engine seals and rubber parts.
> Ethanol results in poorer fuel consumption
> according to several
> automotive publications tests. For us that means
> reduced range and
> endurance since larger fuel tanks and greater weight
> aren't a very good
> choice for us. Those same reports also mention the
> cost of ethanol
> production being higher than gasoline. It is only
> profitable because of
> Federal subsidies. The car manufacturers also
> receive Federal subsidies for
> producing alternate fuel vehicles and ethanol is the
> only immediately
> available alternate. Farmers enjoy higher corn
> prices as well. The
> consumer pays for all of the subsidies as well as
> higher prices for corn and
> beef which is fed with more expensive corn.
> The government is taking care of us again.
> Dennis
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2008 9:44 AM, Joe Spencer
> <jpspencer@cableone.net> wrote:
>
> > Anybody know how the 912s likes autofuel with
> ethanol in it? For all the
> > info that Rotax sends out on their engines I don't
> remember seeing anything
> > on this subject from them. Anyody got a link or
> info?
> >
> > Thx Joe
> >
> > Sad but informative. Those of us using auto fuel
> in our airplane motors
> > now have to consider many additional problems that
> alcohol causes and
> > it's not even good for cars! This was published
> today in the Atlanta
> > Journal-Constitution and written by the CEO of a
> petroleum distributor
> > in Atlanta. Who is pushing ethanol? It's
> apparently not petroleum
> > companies.
> > Ron
> >
> > *
> >
> > *
> >
> >
>
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
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: ethanol in autogas |
Dennis,
In addition to these problems, which are true enough, it takes 3 gallons
of water to make one gallon of ethanol and the water tables are going
down where these processing
plants are located. The pollution from ethanol is a more serious
problem than gasoline and the only reason we're doing this is, as you
say, government support.
I won't buy an E85 vehicle or use that product and we've quit buying
beef, where possible, as a matter of principle.
Larry McFarland
do not archive
Dennis Shoup wrote:
> I recall reading a year ago that Rotax prohibits the use of
> ethanol bearing fuel. Ethanol goes back to the 80's it when was
> called gasohol and car many car manufacturers warned against using it
> because of deterioration of engine seals and rubber parts.
> Ethanol results in poorer fuel consumption according to several
> automotive publications tests. For us that means reduced range and
> endurance since larger fuel tanks and greater weight aren't a very
> good choice for us. Those same reports also mention the cost of
> ethanol production being higher than gasoline. It is only profitable
> because of Federal subsidies. The car manufacturers also receive
> Federal subsidies for producing alternate fuel vehicles and ethanol is
> the only immediately available alternate. Farmers enjoy higher corn
> prices as well. The consumer pays for all of the subsidies as well as
> higher prices for corn and beef which is fed with more expensive corn.
> The government is taking care of us again.
> Dennis
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2008 9:44 AM, Joe Spencer <jpspencer@cableone.net
> <mailto:jpspencer@cableone.net>> wrote:
>
> Anybody know how the 912s likes autofuel with ethanol in it? For
> all the info that Rotax sends out on their engines I don't
> remember seeing anything on this subject from them. Anyody got a
> link or info?
>
> Thx Joe
>
> Sad but informative. Those of us using auto fuel in our airplane
> motors
> now have to consider many additional problems that alcohol causes and
> it's not even good for cars! This was published today in the Atlanta
> Journal-Constitution and written by the CEO of a petroleum
> distributor
> in Atlanta. Who is pushing ethanol? It's apparently not petroleum
> companies.
> Ron
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Copper color Nico sleeves are completely acceptable... they're the
original ones that were used on certified airplanes for a million years.
They eventually offered zinc plated ones for better corrosion
resistance. If you get silver looking ones all you have to do is make
sure they are copper underneath... and not aluminum, which I believe is
NOT OK.
Put a piece of heat shrink tubing over the cable before you do the
Nicopress process, and when you're done slide the heatshrink back onto
thesplice to cover the cut end of the cable and shrink it. This prevents
the cut end from unraveling into sharp little injury machines later.
Gig Giacona wrote:
>
> I ordered some extra Nico sleeves from ACS and instead of the zinc plated ones
they sent copper sleeves.
>
> Are these an acceptable replacement or do I need to send these back?
>
> --------
> 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=161051#161051
>
>
>
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 |
|
Please be careful about recommending that the builder perform the test
flight. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Depends on a lot of factors.
We just lost a 601XL here recently on the first flight, our EAA chapter
lost two very enthusiastic members, and a very good man nearly lost his
life... mostly because he did the first flight himself (and made
incorrect decisions related to the first flight). Only by the grace of
God, he escaped with a couple of scrapes.
He just simply was not the right guy to do the first flight, and his
actions before and during an emergency (912 failure) resulted in a total
loss instead of an otherwise minor incident. And this guy was no
slack-jawed hillbilly either, he is an extremely intelligent
professional who had taken great pains to do almost everything else that
day in a safe manner, flew a recommended "test card", flew very
methodically, etc.
Some builders should be OK to do the first flight on some airplanes, in
some conditions, and with some things going in his/her favor.
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: ethanol in autogas |
All,
SI-912-016
http://www.rotax-aircraft-engines.com/pdf/dokus/d03830.pdf
Page 8
"Fuel with more than 5% alcohol added must not be used."
Best regards,
Craig Moore A&P
Mancelona, MI
701 builder wannabe
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161108#161108
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: ethanol in autogas |
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: ethanol in autogas
<I recall reading a year ago that Rotax prohibits the use of ethanol
bearing fuel. Ethanol goes back to the 80's it when was called gasohol
and car many car manufacturers warned against using it because of
deterioration of engine seals and rubber parts.
Ethanol results in poorer fuel consumption according to several
automotive publications tests.
< Farmers enjoy higher corn prices as well. The consumer pays for all
of the subsidies as well as higher prices for corn and beef which is fed
with more expensive corn.
+++++++++++++++++++
I started burning gasohol in my 81 buick right after I bought it new
in 1981, it was still running great with no problems when I sold it with
130,000 miles on it. I still run gasohol in my car and pickup.
As far as the "expensive corn" that is being fed to the cattle, this
is called brewers grain, and is currently being given to the feedlots.
R. Johnson
Dodge City, Kansas
do not archive
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
I have to take back some of what I wrote here... I forgot to mention the
stainless and galvanized issue. However I do know that the standard
copper Nico sleeves are used on tens of thousands of certified
airplanes, and those planes include ones with galvanized and ones with
stainless cables.
Bottom line (despite what I wrote here and previously) use whichever one
does not create a corrosion problem with your cables.
Bill Berle wrote:
>
> Copper color Nico sleeves are completely acceptable... they're the
> original ones that were used on certified airplanes for a million
> years. They eventually offered zinc plated ones for better corrosion
> resistance. If you get silver looking ones all you have to do is make
> sure they are copper underneath... and not aluminum, which I believe
> is NOT OK.
>
> Put a piece of heat shrink tubing over the cable before you do the
> Nicopress process, and when you're done slide the heatshrink back onto
> thesplice to cover the cut end of the cable and shrink it. This
> prevents the cut end from unraveling into sharp little injury machines
> later.
>
> Gig Giacona wrote:
>> <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net>
>>
>> I ordered some extra Nico sleeves from ACS and instead of the zinc
>> plated ones they sent copper sleeves.
>>
>> Are these an acceptable replacement or do I need to send these back?
>>
>> --------
>> 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=161051#161051
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | ethanol in autogas |
Kitplanes just did a tour of the Rotax plant and asked the ethanol question.
Here is what the factory says:
"I asked about ethanol in gasoline. (Premium auto gas is the recommended
912/914 fuel.) The answer: Up to 5% is OK if airframe systems can tolerate
it
Overall it is a very interesting article for Rotax and non-Rotax owners
alike. But you have to be a subscriber. For example I had heard that you
could fly a 912 at 50% power after loss of coolant. But the following was
news to me:
"Now focusing on the 912/914 market, Rotax noted some of the unconventional
features. Liquid-cooling the cylinder heads adds to the durability of the
valves, valve seats and the heads themselves. The engines can fly for up to
an hour without coolant, as the lower liners are air-cooled."
-- Craig
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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Oops. Never mind. For some reason I was thinking the cables that came from Zenith
were SS. My buddy Jay B set me straight, as he often does.
--------
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=161119#161119
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Part Stoutness |
I have been flying my 701 since August. It is built exactly to plans with the
only modification being head rests.
Unless you slip the plane or are flying very slowly, oil canning is not a problem.
I have noted that it appears to be somewhat more noisy in the winter than
summer. I assume that the skin is a bit tighter in the heat.
I plan to put some sound proofing around the baggage area, but otherwise leave
it alone.
I have flown other 701 that make more noise. I think that if you are not careful
to get the sides carefully cut and placed, the airplane may oil can more than
if they are smooth and evenly bowed as designed.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161129#161129
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 |
|
| Subject: | Adding an opening window on a 701 |
I have bubble doors on my 701 and would like to make doors that have a window that
can be opened in flight (mostly for taking pictures).
Has anyone out there built such a door?
I was thinking of making a pair of doors to the plans for the standard ones and
make the top panel (with its own aluminum tubing frame) hinge up with latches
at the middle of the door.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161133#161133
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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
The zink plated sleeves are copper. They can be use interchangeably. I work in
the motion pix biz and we use them on galvinized, stainless steel, and all types
of cable. aircraft, crain, etc.
Just make sure you use the proper crimping tehnique and a go-nogo gauge.
Bob
N642Z reserved
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 |
|
does anyone know where you can get the new cowling for the 914 shown on the zenith
web site ? the site has no info on it
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 |
|
Bill, It may not be exactly legal, I think I would have the test pilot take the
plane to a non towered field and do your thing. And don't do a lot of bragging
about how well things went.
After you are comfortable, do your 40 hrs. at your home field.
I don't even have my license yet and have to watch my partner/sister fly off the
time before I can even use it for my training. You don't have it all bad.
Good luck and the first flight is a gas.(I would imagine)
--------
Do not archive
Dan Stanton
N9801S
99.9% Done & Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161150#161150
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Flight report & question-701 |
I have about 90 hours on my 701 and I discovered a few weeks ago that with full
back elevator, and full (or nearly so) power you can put the tail into the dirt.
I was landing on a dirt strip and hit a mud puddle. I went to add power to keep
from getting bogged down but added a bit too much power. I rotated the tail
right into the ground.
My plane is very stock. With no one in the plane, if you push the tail all the
way down it will stay put with the tail on the ground (don't remember how much
fuel I had when I tried this). So, when the weight of the plane is on the wheels
(as opposed to the wings), once the tail gets to a certain point it doesn't
take too much more down force to take it all the way down. Clearly the prop
blast provides enough elevator authority to push the tail to the ground.
On the 701 I start my ground roll with neutral elevator and when the airspeed moves
past 20 I gently lift the nose. On my Cessna 206 I start with the control
all the way aft and relax pressure as the nose lifts. If I were to start the
takeoff in the 701 with the control all the way back I could easily see how
it would simply take the tail all the way down as it all happens so fast.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161155#161155
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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Bill,
you can use Copper all day long, its on all taildraggers built since God was a
toddler.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Bill Berle <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
>Sent: Jan 29, 2008 12:16 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK?
>
>
>I have to take back some of what I wrote here... I forgot to mention the
>stainless and galvanized issue. However I do know that the standard
>copper Nico sleeves are used on tens of thousands of certified
>airplanes, and those planes include ones with galvanized and ones with
>stainless cables.
>
>Bottom line (despite what I wrote here and previously) use whichever one
>does not create a corrosion problem with your cables.
>
>Bill Berle wrote:
>>
>> Copper color Nico sleeves are completely acceptable... they're the
>> original ones that were used on certified airplanes for a million
>> years. They eventually offered zinc plated ones for better corrosion
>> resistance. If you get silver looking ones all you have to do is make
>> sure they are copper underneath... and not aluminum, which I believe
>> is NOT OK.
>>
>> Put a piece of heat shrink tubing over the cable before you do the
>> Nicopress process, and when you're done slide the heatshrink back onto
>> thesplice to cover the cut end of the cable and shrink it. This
>> prevents the cut end from unraveling into sharp little injury machines
>> later.
>>
>> Gig Giacona wrote:
>>> <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net>
>>>
>>> I ordered some extra Nico sleeves from ACS and instead of the zinc
>>> plated ones they sent copper sleeves.
>>>
>>> Are these an acceptable replacement or do I need to send these back?
>>>
>>> --------
>>> 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=161051#161051
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
Just remember if you do anything like that you have 0 insurance should
something happen. And I doubt any CFI will say he was flying and have that on
his
record should things go wrong.
do not archive
**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
Message 35
| 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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Another Q.
What should they be pull tested to? I read that the cables only have to be 30lb
tension but what should I pull test to, to make sure my sleeves are OK to use.?
Chris.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161166#161166
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
For someone who doesn't even have your license yet you sure seem quick to have
someone else put theirs up for grabs.
And those non-towered fields are often chocked full of people that will report
you.
dj45 wrote:
> Bill, It may not be exactly legal, I think I would have the test pilot take the
plane to a non towered field and do your thing. And don't do a lot of bragging
about how well things went.
> After you are comfortable, do your 40 hrs. at your home field.
> I don't even have my license yet and have to watch my partner/sister fly off
the time before I can even use it for my training. You don't have it all bad.
> Good luck and the first flight is a gas.(I would imagine)
--------
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=161169#161169
Message 37
| 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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
chris,
its not a pull test. the niccos go on with a diameter setting, and you measure
it with slot tester. if it is crimped,correctly,(center first, then out from center)
you can move it in and out of the slot tester. The 30 lbs, is inch pounds,
and its roughly 4 foot lbs with a cable tensionomter. Borrow one if possible,
they run expensive. other option is to tighten until just before they start
to impedemovement on full deflection. That is what I did. Just tight enough
for comfortable movement. Too loose and you can get little bit of flutter,
to much and you are arm wrestling it.
NOTE: after 5 or so hours, RETENSION THE CABLES! they do loosen up.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: chris Sinfield <chris_sinfield@yahoo.com.au>
>Sent: Jan 29, 2008 3:33 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK?
>
>
>Another Q.
>What should they be pull tested to? I read that the cables only have to be 30lb
tension but what should I pull test to, to make sure my sleeves are OK to use.?
>Chris.
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161166#161166
>
>
Message 38
| 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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
You don't pull test them. After crimping the correct sleeve on the
correct size cable, a go/no go gauge is used to check the size of the
crimp. If it falls within the minimum and maximum size range, the crimp
is good. The go/no go gauge should come with the nicopress tool.
chris Sinfield wrote:
>
> Another Q.
> What should they be pull tested to? I read that the cables only have to be 30lb
tension but what should I pull test to, to make sure my sleeves are OK to use.?
> Chris.
>
>
--
Bryan Martin
Zenith 601XL N61BM
Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive
Do Not Archive
Message 39
| 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: Sleeves on cable |
do not archive
List,
Not to start a flame war, but an old crop duster I knew insisted on two sleeves
per end.
In later years, when he discovered heat-shrink tubing, he put two pieces on the
cable prior to crimping;
one larger than the other. After the crimp was finished he'd put a short (1/2
inch) piece over the loose end, then slide the smaller diameter of the two up
to cover the loose end and apply heat. Then the second, larger diameter tubing,
over the first. Beats black tape.
I once asked about the necessity of two sleeves. His rather gruff reply was to
the effect that the cable would break before his two sleeves allowed the cable
to slip....one less item to worry about while killing bugs amongst trees, power
lines, and fences at 100 MPH and three feet off the ground.
He lived to be 85; your results may differ.
Regards to all.
Zed/701/R912/90+%/etc
Winds westerly 18-25, gusts have hit 51 so far in North Texas....probably not a
701 day.
Message 40
| 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: Sleeves on cable |
Ref Heatshrink on cable crimps.
Raa has a AD not to use heatshrink on cable crimps there has been corrosion
problems under the heatshrink.
probably caused by retension of moistuer on the cable one Drifter had
considerable corrosion
all cables were to be checked and heat shrink removed
Graemecns
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zed Smith" <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 7:18 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Sleeves on cable
>
> do not archive
>
> List,
> Not to start a flame war, but an old crop duster I knew insisted on two
> sleeves per end.
> In later years, when he discovered heat-shrink tubing, he put two pieces
> on the cable prior to crimping;
> one larger than the other. After the crimp was finished he'd put a short
> (1/2 inch) piece over the loose end, then slide the smaller diameter of
> the two up to cover the loose end and apply heat. Then the second, larger
> diameter tubing, over the first. Beats black tape.
>
> I once asked about the necessity of two sleeves. His rather gruff reply
> was to the effect that the cable would break before his two sleeves
> allowed the cable to slip....one less item to worry about while killing
> bugs amongst trees, power lines, and fences at 100 MPH and three feet off
> the ground.
>
> He lived to be 85; your results may differ.
>
> Regards to all.
>
> Zed/701/R912/90+%/etc
>
> Winds westerly 18-25, gusts have hit 51 so far in North Texas....probably
> not a 701 day.
>
>
> --
> 29/01/2008 9:51 AM
>
>
Message 41
| 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: Forming blocks - a 'right of passage"??? |
My form block reliefs were all done by hand. I was going to use the tapered router
bit method, but I would've had to wait three or four days till I could get
to a shop that had them from where I live, so I decided to start there and then.
Roughed out with a rasp, then finished with a file using an aluminum angle as a
jig. See here:
http://eastcoastit.net.au/zenith/?p=58
If form blocks are a rite of passage, then I've done my time.
Glenn
--------
Glenn Andressen
601XL- just started.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161198#161198
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Well, I certainly did ask for that.
--------
Do not archive
Dan Stanton
N9801S
99.9% Done & Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161207#161207
Message 43
| 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: Adding an opening window on a 701 |
I have flown with Rob Hunker, here in Colorado. I don't know if he tracks t
he list, but I think you can get an email off to him from his information o
n the Zenith website.
Keith
TDY away from home, here in State College, PA.
***************************************************************************
*********
dkandle wrote:
d_kandle@flywild.net>
I have bubble doors on my 701 and would like to make doors that have a wind
ow that can be opened in flight (mostly for taking pictures).
Has anyone out there built such a door?
I was thinking of making a pair of doors to the plans for the standard ones
and make the top panel (with its own aluminum tubing frame) hinge up with
latches at the middle of the door.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161133#161133
--
*************************************
Keith Ashcraft
ITT Industries
Advanced Engineering & Sciences
5009 Centennial Blvd.
Colorado Springs, CO
80919
(719) 599-1787 -- work
(719) 332-4364 -- cell
keith.ashcraft@itt.com<mailto:keith.ashcraft@itt.com>
________________________________
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be proprietary and are in
tended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addr
essed. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender.
Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely
those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of ITT Corporati
on. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the pres
ence of viruses. ITT accepts no liability for any damage caused by any viru
s transmitted by this e-mail.
Message 44
| 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: Are Copper Nico Sleeves OK? |
Lots of folks do this but I stopped many yrs ago when I discovered a sleeve
that was slipping under the heatshrink. The heatshrink was crinkled slightly
which gave it away. Now I put witness paint on the bitter end along with a
little clear fingernail polish on the extreme end to keep it from
unraveling.
LO&SLO John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Berle" <victorbravo@sbcglobal.net>
> Put a piece of heat shrink tubing over the cable before you do the
> Nicopress process, and when you're done slide the heatshrink back onto
> thesplice to cover the cut end of the cable and shrink it. This prevents
> the cut end from unraveling into sharp little injury machines later.
>
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
All-
As I said, I would do all that was LEGAL to ensure my confidence.
I'm not looking for ways to buck the system.
Is there anything illegal with letting another qualified person make
one or more flights, then passing on his findings before the owner gets
in the cockpit? Start the 40 hrs from that point? I'm interested in the
responses from flying posters, but don't want to drag this thread on.
Over and out.
Bill
do not archive
Bill Naumuk
Townville, Pa.
HDS Fuse/Corvair
Message 46
| 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 |
|
Let me give you a CFI's perspective. In short, we are supposed to know better.
The FAA would show little sympathy to a CFI shown to be bending the rules.
Another issue that comes up is pilot in command. As a CFI, even if I am not acting
as pilot in command by legal definition, I am expected to do my best to exert
some influence over the flying pilot to conduct the flight in a safe manner.
Numerous legal cases have found that pilot "passengers" with higher ratings
than the flying pilot have some culpability when it comes to accidents and etc.
The attitude is: "he should have done something."
Personally, I might use my personal aircraft to help a fellow prepare to fly his
own 601 but I would refuse to give him any dual in his plane until the required
hours were flown off. I have had a CFII for 23 years and plan to keep it.
Tim
do not archive
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Working on fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161231#161231
Message 47
| 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 |
|
Reply to Bill's last post - I don't believe the 40 hours has to be flown off by
the same person. If you have a test pilot make the first few flights and then
take over, his hours should count towards the total.
Tim
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Working on fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161233#161233
Message 48
| 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 |
|
Just finished up bending the skin for one of my ailerons. Just wanted people's
opinions on the fit of the rib to the skin and the joint where the hinge attaches.
The rib appears to be about 1mm under.
The picture with no clamps is before I fiddled with the rib flanges to make then
exactly 90 degrees.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161238#161238
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/picture_018_202.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/picture_019_127.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/picture_020_320.jpg
Message 49
| 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: Forming blocks - a 'right of passage"??? |
Don't bother with the relief cuts. You will have to finish the bend with
your hands some anyway regardless. Just get to making some parts.
jhines wrote:
>
> When I first decided to switch to scratch building, I thought it would be easy
to find a builder willing to pass on his old forming block when finished with
them. I was surprised when my post last year got no responses offering to sell
old forming blocks. Now I see why. Building these things is a kind of a
'right of passage". No one should be able to say that they scratch built a plane
if they didn't have to make these things. Cutting metal and popping rivets
is
Message 50
| 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: Flight report & question-701 |
My 701 tail also stays down if you push it to the ground and also tries to
climb very steeply on takeoff if I don't set the trim down. I attribute this
to the 40# of BRS chute behind the baggage compartment, which puts my empty
CG toward the back of the allowed range (about 375mm aft of the front of the
slats).
The CG in my 701 / Rotax 912ULS is, however, within the allowed range (just
under than 500mm aft limit) even with 370# pilot-passenger, 20 Gal. of fuel,
and 50# of baggage.
Can you tell us what engine you have, where does your empty CG fall, and
what is the weight of your 701? (You could also have an aft GC if your
engine is lighter than my 912, even without a chute). With a lighter engine
your AOA could go very high.
Did you do much damage to your plane when the tail hit?
Regards,
Les
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of dkandle
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 12:11 PM
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Flight report & question-701
>
>
> I have about 90 hours on my 701 and I discovered a few weeks
> ago that with full back elevator, and full (or nearly so)
> power you can put the tail into the dirt.
> I was landing on a dirt strip and hit a mud puddle. I went
> to add power to keep from getting bogged down but added a bit
> too much power. I rotated the tail right into the ground.
> My plane is very stock. With no one in the plane, if you
> push the tail all the way down it will stay put with the tail
> on the ground (don't remember how much fuel I had when I
> tried this). So, when the weight of the plane is on the
> wheels (as opposed to the wings), once the tail gets to a
> certain point it doesn't take too much more down force to
> take it all the way down. Clearly the prop blast provides
> enough elevator authority to push the tail to the ground.
> On the 701 I start my ground roll with neutral elevator and
> when the airspeed moves past 20 I gently lift the nose. On
> my Cessna 206 I start with the control all the way aft and
> relax pressure as the nose lifts. If I were to start the
> takeoff in the 701 with the control all the way back I could
> easily see how it would simply take the tail all the way down
> as it all happens so fast.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161155#161155
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Photoshare, and much much more:
>
>
Message 51
| 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: | Flying a 701 without doors |
Has anyone flown their 701 without doors? Does wind from a prop make flying
without doors uncomfortable? Are there concerns about stability with the
doors off?
Now that I have over 10 hours in my new 701 I am thinking more about
enjoying the flying and a little less about learning to fly the plane. I
flew my Challenger II pusher without doors all of the time (even over the
Sierras at 12000'). This allowed me to take better pictures and get a much
better view of the countryside. Here in Northern California the scenery and
visibility is really great and I have take some pictures I really treasure
in my no-door Challenger.
Thanks for helping me,
Les
Message 52
| 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: Flying a 701 without doors |
I have flown mine a few hours with the doors off. This in the summer, at above
80 deg. It's windy in the cockpit and there can be no loose items anywhere. The
baggage compartment oil-cans if empty. It can be a little chilly up at a few
thousand feet. But it is a real blast! Only way to go, above 90F! Have to have
wind guards on the headset mics. Jaunts over ocean are great. Can be downright
vertigo-causing when looking down. Really involves you in the sensation
of flight. I modified the top hinge pin so it can be pulled out/reinstalled
easily by hand. I also have the gas cylinders but they have a little capture
pin that can be removed quickly, so maybe 5 min to remove, and 10min to install
door pair. Highly recommended. Flight characteristics not noticeably different,
maybe a few mph slower, and it seems really loud and buffety to fly faster
than 80-85mph. Authority in flare not noticeably compromised, but I fly with
a more rearward CG and never had trouble keeping the nose up during all phases
of landing.
Bill Mileski
Ledyard, CT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161269#161269
Message 53
| 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: ethanol in autogas |
Larry,
Those of us that live in the Heartland of the United States wish to purchase products
made in the United States to support our neighbors and citizens of the
United States. I gladly burn American Made E85 in my E85 enabled, American Made
pickup truck. And am planning to design my 601 XL engine to also run on E85.
I ate American Made beef and vegetables for my supper tonight, while watching
the free water falling out of the sky in the form of snow. Water is not used
up. It is always recycled. And I don't believe we are going to run out in
the next thousand years. The oceans are rising aren't they? And I don't wish
to support any more middle eastern oil sheiks and increase our foreign deficit.
I like American Made tools also. And the things you say about alcohol production
simply aren't true or relevant to the subject of burning alcohol in
our airplanes.
Don Mountain
Dennis,
In addition to these problems, which are true enough, it takes 3 gallons
of water to make one gallon of ethanol and the water tables are going
down where these processing
plants are located. The pollution from ethanol is a more serious
problem than gasoline and the only reason we're doing this is, as you
say, government support.
I won't buy an E85 vehicle or use that product and we've quit buying
beef, where possible, as a matter of principle.
Larry McFarland
do not archive
Dennis Shoup wrote:
> I recall reading a year ago that Rotax prohibits the use of
> ethanol bearing fuel. Ethanol goes back to the 80's it when was
> called gasohol and car many car manufacturers warned against using it
> because of deterioration of engine seals and rubber parts.
> Ethanol results in poorer fuel consumption according to several
> automotive publications tests. For us that means reduced range and
> endurance since larger fuel tanks and greater weight aren't a very
> good choice for us. Those same reports also mention the cost of
> ethanol production being higher than gasoline. It is only profitable
> because of Federal subsidies. The car manufacturers also receive
> Federal subsidies for producing alternate fuel vehicles and ethanol is
> the only immediately available alternate. Farmers enjoy higher corn
> prices as well. The consumer pays for all of the subsidies as well as
> higher prices for corn and beef which is fed with more expensive corn.
> The government is taking care of us again.
> Dennis
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2008 9:44 AM, Joe Spencer
> > wrote:
>
> Anybody know how the 912s likes autofuel with ethanol in it? For
> all the info that Rotax sends out on their engines I don't
> remember seeing anything on this subject from them. Anyody got a
> link or info?
>
> Thx Joe
>
> Sad but informative. Those of us using auto fuel in our airplane
> motors
> now have to consider many additional problems that alcohol causes and
> it's not even good for cars! This was published today in the Atlanta
> Journal-Constitution and written by the CEO of a petroleum
> distributor
> in Atlanta. Who is pushing ethanol? It's apparently not petroleum
> companies.
> Ron
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
Message 54
| 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: | XCOM radio and seperate intercom |
I have an XCOM radio with the built in intercom (2 place for me) and was wondering
about anyone else's experience with it. Should i look at adding the sigtronics
intercom? Is it necessary? In the write ups and demo dvd it looks like it
will work well. Any thoughts.
--------
CH701
60% Complete
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161276#161276
Message 55
| 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: XCOM radio and seperate intercom |
Haven flown yet but my wife and I both sit in the cockpit and make airplane
noises. The XCOM seems perfect with its intercom. More later..
SW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Colbeck" <mark@masterpieceliving.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 9:13 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: XCOM radio and seperate intercom
> <mark@masterpieceliving.ca>
>
> I have an XCOM radio with the built in intercom (2 place for me) and was
> wondering about anyone else's experience with it. Should i look at adding
> the sigtronics intercom? Is it necessary? In the write ups and demo dvd it
> looks like it will work well. Any thoughts.
>
> --------
> CH701
> 60% Complete
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161276#161276
>
>
>
Message 56
| 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: | Spinner with Cooling Fins |
Recently someone mentioned a propeller manufacture who installed "cooling
fins" on their spinners. Does anyone have information on this? Jim
Message 57
| 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 |
|
Add a shim between the rib flange and the skin, about .040" should do it.
--------
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=161281#161281
Message 58
| 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 |
|
Andy
Perhaps I'm misinterpreting your photos, but it looks to me like the 20-mm
flange at the top of the front skin is bent out away from the aileron. In
my kit (and in dwg. 6-W-2), the flange is bent inward and encloses the
ribs. The attached photo shows the inboard end of my right aileron, so you
can judge the fit I on mine.
Terry
At 05:15 PM 1/29/2008 -0800, you wrote:
>Just finished up bending the skin for one of my ailerons. Just wanted
>people's opinions on the fit of the rib to the skin and the joint where
>the hinge attaches. The rib appears to be about 1mm under.
>
>The picture with no clamps is before I fiddled with the rib flanges to
>make then exactly 90 degrees.
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
601XL/Jab 3300 slow build kit - Tail, flaps, & ailerons are done; working
on the wings
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/
Message 59
| 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 |
|
Andy
Perhaps I'm misinterpreting your photos, but it looks to me like the 20-mm
flange at the top of the front skin is bent out away from the aileron. In
my kit (and in dwg. 6-W-2), the flange is bent inward and encloses the
ribs. The attached photo shows the inboard end of my right aileron, so you
can judge the fit I on mine.
Whoops--here is the attachment.
Terry
At 05:15 PM 1/29/2008 -0800, you wrote:
>Just finished up bending the skin for one of my ailerons. Just wanted
>people's opinions on the fit of the rib to the skin and the joint where
>the hinge attaches. The rib appears to be about 1mm under.
>
>The picture with no clamps is before I fiddled with the rib flanges to
>make then exactly 90 degrees.
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
601XL/Jab 3300 slow build kit - Tail, flaps, & ailerons are done; working
on the wings
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/
Message 60
| 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: Adding an opening window on a 701 |
I have just such a door, with an opening window. It is as you describe, an aluminum
frame, another piano hinge at the top, and latches in the middle.
The first version was too flimsy - using 1/2 inch tubing - not continuous - and
relying on the plastic to take some of the strain. When we opened it, the front
of it flew up, and broke off, cutting my copilot on the arm, and hurting his
shoulder.
The current version uses 3/4 inch square tubing, welded to the correct shape. It
opens easily, and pretty much stays open on its own. My photographer has a much
better view than from the Cessna 172 that we used to use.
Fred Sanford..Santa Barbara, Ca....N9701...100 hours
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=161300#161300
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! --
|