---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 05/09/11: 5 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 08:42 AM - Re: Advisory Circular (FLYaDIVE) 2. 08:43 AM - Re: Question about handling CH601XLB post mods/flight evauation (sdthatcher) 3. 12:49 PM - Re: Advisory Circular (Paul Mulwitz) 4. 02:58 PM - Re: Advisory Circular (Ron Steele) 5. 04:09 PM - Re: Advisory Circular (Paul Mulwitz) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 08:42:54 AM PST US Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Advisory Circular From: FLYaDIVE Right you are Don: I fly a couple of planes that are responsive (RV6, RV6A, AA1, AA5x). RESPONSIVE is the word, not sensitive. And that is the way a plane should fly. I love taking a Cessna pilot up for a ride. I'll ask him if he knows how to do a 60 Bank Steep Turn. Of course the answer is YES. OK, I say .... When I say GO you do it... I'll wait a few minutes, let them relax and get the feel and then say GO! Within a blink and a half they have the plane either in a 70 or 80 Deg Bank or they turn white knuckle and say YOUR PLANE! It is really not a case of stressing a plane. The plane is capable of most anything you would consider doing as a NEW pilot to that plane. But it sure puts a new respect into their heart about not being the worlds greatest test pilot. Of course you would NOT or should NOT consider going IFR in a plane you are not familiar with. There are even courses on how to fly a plane with a laminar flow wing. Barry > > Some of you may be interested in Advisory Circular #90-109, dated 3/30/11 > regarding transitioning to new or different aircraft. It specifically > references the Zodiac, among others, as belonging to a group of aircraft > that: > > > *(2) * > > There are many more experimental airplanes that may look more like type > certificated (TC) airplanes, but they actually have light control forces > and/or very quick maneuvering response. Lightweight and lightly wing-loaded > airplanes can also have the same quick, light response as many aerobatic > airplanes. The hazard of light forces and rapid response is that without > some level of training, the pilot may over-control the airplane. This can > manifest itself during any phase of flight. The risks can vary from > frustration to damage during takeoff and landing, to loss of control up to > and including overstressing the airframe and structural failure. > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 08:43:37 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Question about handling CH601XLB post mods/flight evauation From: "sdthatcher" Hi Jeff. After the mod, the geometry for the center spar has changed somewhat. Make sure the cables are not rubbing against each other, especially the rudder and/or elevator against the aileron cable. These tolerances are fairly tight so you may need to either add a pulley, change the fairlead or move the cables beneath the offending ones. As for flight, the 601XLB handles better than it did before... much more stable for some reason. Might be due to my rigging the ailerons better this time! I still have a heavy left wing although that's expected due to my weight which I am slowly binging down to my old smoking days. -------- Scott Thatcher, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 601XL with Corvair, Registered as E-LSA N601EL, EAA203 42 hours and holding. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=339315#339315 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 12:49:22 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Advisory Circular Hi Barry, I think the point the FAA guys are trying to make about sensitivity is really about the amount of force a pilot needs to apply to get a given response. All Spam Cans are pretty stodgy compared to many experimental or LSA models. This is required by part 23. I don't have much time in Zodiacs but I have a lot in the last 2 years in LSA. In both cases the force needed to get a large pitch response is a lot less than the force used on a Cessna or Piper. The Zodiac is a little funny because the pitch force is very light while the roll force is very stiff. For pilots who have flown only one or two different airplane models it is common to think it is the amount of force applied to the control yoke or stick that a pilot needs to learn. After flying 10 or 20 different planes you learn the force doesn't even matter. Rather, you apply whatever force is needed to get the attitude you want. This is the sort of issue transition training deals with for pilots with few models under their belt. I think the new advisory circular is a real value. It probably is this circular that made it possible for me to get first flight insurance without any time in type for the Zodiac. My experience with a Tecnam Echo really applies to the Zodiac challenge quite well. Paul Camas, WA XL nearing inspection. On 5/9/2011 8:15 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote: > Right you are Don: > > I fly a couple of planes that are responsive (RV6, RV6A, AA1, AA5x). > RESPONSIVE is the word, not sensitive. And that is the way a plane > should fly. > > I love taking a Cessna pilot up for a ride. I'll ask him if he knows > how to do a 60 Bank Steep Turn. Of course the answer is YES. OK, I > say .... When I say GO you do it... I'll wait a few minutes, let them > relax and get the feel and then say GO! Within a blink and a half > they have the plane either in a 70 or 80 Deg Bank or they turn white > knuckle and say YOUR PLANE! > > It is really not a case of stressing a plane. The plane is capable of > most anything you would consider doing as a NEW pilot to that plane. > But it sure puts a new respect into their heart about not being the > worlds greatest test pilot. Of course you would NOT or should NOT > consider going IFR in a plane you are not familiar with. > > There are even courses on how to fly a plane with a laminar flow wing. > > Barry > > > Some of you may be interested in Advisory Circular #90-109, dated > 3/30/11 regarding transitioning to new or different aircraft. It > specifically references the Zodiac, among others, as belonging to > a group of aircraft that: > > *(2) * > > There are many more experimental airplanes that may look more like > type certificated (TC) airplanes, but they actually have light > control forces and/or very quick maneuvering response. Lightweight > and lightly wing-loaded airplanes can also have the same quick, > light response as many aerobatic airplanes. The hazard of light > forces and rapid response is that without some level of training, > the pilot may over-control the airplane. This can manifest itself > during any phase of flight. The risks can vary from frustration to > damage during takeoff and landing, to loss of control up to and > including overstressing the airframe and structural failure. > > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 02:58:01 PM PST US From: Ron Steele Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Advisory Circular Paul, I'm looking forward to your first flight. I earned my SP in an Echo Super so the comparison will be very interesting to me. From my experience and what I've read about the 601, I wouldn't think they would be too similar. Keep us posted, please. Ron On 05/09/2011 12:40 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > Hi Barry, > > I think the point the FAA guys are trying to make about sensitivity is > really about the amount of force a pilot needs to apply to get a given > response. All Spam Cans are pretty stodgy compared to many > experimental or LSA models. This is required by part 23. > > I don't have much time in Zodiacs but I have a lot in the last 2 years > in LSA. In both cases the force needed to get a large pitch response > is a lot less than the force used on a Cessna or Piper. The Zodiac is > a little funny because the pitch force is very light while the roll > force is very stiff. > > For pilots who have flown only one or two different airplane models it > is common to think it is the amount of force applied to the control > yoke or stick that a pilot needs to learn. After flying 10 or 20 > different planes you learn the force doesn't even matter. Rather, you > apply whatever force is needed to get the attitude you want. This is > the sort of issue transition training deals with for pilots with few > models under their belt. > > I think the new advisory circular is a real value. It probably is > this circular that made it possible for me to get first flight > insurance without any time in type for the Zodiac. My experience with > a Tecnam Echo really applies to the Zodiac challenge quite well. > > Paul > Camas, WA > XL nearing inspection. > > On 5/9/2011 8:15 AM, FLYaDIVE wrote: >> Right you are Don: >> >> I fly a couple of planes that are responsive (RV6, RV6A, AA1, AA5x). >> RESPONSIVE is the word, not sensitive. And that is the way a plane >> should fly. >> >> I love taking a Cessna pilot up for a ride. I'll ask him if he knows >> how to do a 60 Bank Steep Turn. Of course the answer is YES. OK, I >> say .... When I say GO you do it... I'll wait a few minutes, let them >> relax and get the feel and then say GO! Within a blink and a half >> they have the plane either in a 70 or 80 Deg Bank or they turn white >> knuckle and say YOUR PLANE! >> >> It is really not a case of stressing a plane. The plane is capable >> of most anything you would consider doing as a NEW pilot to that >> plane. But it sure puts a new respect into their heart about not >> being the worlds greatest test pilot. Of course you would NOT or >> should NOT consider going IFR in a plane you are not familiar with. >> >> There are even courses on how to fly a plane with a laminar flow wing. >> >> Barry >> >> >> Some of you may be interested in Advisory Circular #90-109, dated >> 3/30/11 regarding transitioning to new or different aircraft. It >> specifically references the Zodiac, among others, as belonging to >> a group of aircraft that: >> >> *(2) * >> >> There are many more experimental airplanes that may look more >> like type certificated (TC) airplanes, but they actually have >> light control forces and/or very quick maneuvering response. >> Lightweight and lightly wing-loaded airplanes can also have the >> same quick, light response as many aerobatic airplanes. The >> hazard of light forces and rapid response is that without some >> level of training, the pilot may over-control the airplane. This >> can manifest itself during any phase of flight. The risks can >> vary from frustration to damage during takeoff and landing, to >> loss of control up to and including overstressing the airframe >> and structural failure. >> >> * >> >> >> * > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 04:09:34 PM PST US From: Paul Mulwitz Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Advisory Circular Hi Ron, I'm looking forward to it too! The Zodiac and Echo Super are almost identical in all the important respects. They have similar empty and gross weights, the same wing area, the same top speed (give or take), the same stall speed and wing loading. Both have two seats side by side, flaps, tricycle gear, nose gear steering, and dual throttle knobs. The differences include: My Zodiac has a bigger engine (Jabiru 3300); low wing vs. high wing; Center stick vs. dual sticks; toe brakes vs. center single brake handle. My Zodiac has carburetor heat while the Tecnam does not. In my case the avionics are even nearly identical. Both planes have dual Dynon 100/120 screens. Both have Garmin GPS (296 vs Aera 500). Radios are Garmin SL30 Nav/Comm vs SL 40 Comm. They have identical stick grips, but the Tecnam didn't have aileron trim and the Zodiac does. My Zodiac has an LRI. My Echo had an autopilot and backup steam gauges. The input force requirements and responses are different. This is not very important to me since I have flown some 30 different make/model airplanes. It would be very difficult to find two more similar planes. This is not a big surprise since both were designed to be maximum LSA designs. Paul On 5/9/2011 1:28 PM, Ron Steele wrote: > > Paul, > I'm looking forward to your first flight. I earned my SP in an > Echo Super so the comparison will be very interesting to me. From my > experience and what I've read about the 601, I wouldn't think they > would be too similar. Keep us posted, please. > > Ron > > On 05/09/2011 12:40 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: >> Hi Barry, >> >> I think the point the FAA guys are trying to make about sensitivity >> is really about the amount of force a pilot needs to apply to get a >> given response. All Spam Cans are pretty stodgy compared to many >> experimental or LSA models. This is required by part 23. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message zenith-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Zenith-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/zenith-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/zenith-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.