Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:05 AM - Re: Re: 601XL/TD (Jim Belcher)
2. 06:13 AM - Re: Re: 601XL/TD (Jay Maynard)
3. 08:42 AM - Re: 601XL/TD (Gig Giacona)
4. 08:47 AM - Re: 601/650 WING Construction DVD (ashontz)
5. 09:16 AM - Re: Re: 601/650 WING Construction DVD (Jon Croke)
6. 09:17 AM - Re: New Rudder Question (ashontz)
7. 09:26 AM - Re: 601/650 WING Construction DVD (ashontz)
8. 09:36 AM - Re: Re: New Rudder Question (David Downey)
9. 10:10 AM - 601XL TD for sale - Steal it for $65,000 (Leo Gates)
10. 10:59 AM - Project Almost Done - Cleaning House... (Don Honabach)
11. 12:04 PM - Re: Re: 601XL/TD (Jim Belcher)
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 |
|
On Wednesday 03 September 2008 19:14, M.Marcotte wrote:
Somehow, we managed to fly taildraggers for years, until we got enough
performance that we could afford the extra weight and drag of a tricycle
gear. There's no question that they are slightly more difficult to land (and
perhaps, to a lesser extent, take off). And yes, modern design has managed to
reduce the impact of tricycle gear. It doesn't eliminate it, but it certainly
reduces it.
But it begs the original issue. Is the limited performance we have with LSAs
such that we should seriously consider trimming all the weight and drag we
can, to the extent of considering tail wheel aircraft?
The 601/650 is one of the better designs around (the best, in my judgement),
yet it could still use all the additional payload it can get. Tricytcle gears
usually weigh more than conventional gears. There isn't too much obvious
additional reduction in drag one could get, other than maybe going to a
conventional gear.
I say all this with considerable trepedation. By the time I began taking
flying lessons (1968), most training was done in tricycle gear aircraft, and
I've never flown a conventionally geared aircraft.
Still, if money and other factors permitted, I'd still be flying my Cherokee
180, so I must consider all factors before making a final committment.
> They also eat runway lights for breakfast... :-)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Gower
> To: zenith601-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 12:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: 601XL/TD
>
>
> Paul:
>
> Real Pilots fly Tail Draggers
>
> Real Bikers ride Kick Starters
>
> :-) :-) :-) ;-)
>
> Saludos
> Gary Gower
> PLEASE Do not archive.
>
>
> --- On Wed, 7/30/08, Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net> wrote:
>
> From: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: 601XL/TD
> To: zenith601-list@matronics.com
> Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2008, 10:02 PM
>
>
>
> There are some down side issues with tail draggers too.
>
> Tail draggers have much higher accident rates than tricycle gear
> planes. The accidents are not usually fatal or even very bad for
> human injury, but the damage to the planes is expensive. That means
> insurance can be a lot higher for tail draggers.
>
> My own (mostly uninformed) opinion is that tail draggers were never
> really meant for use on runways and particularly not on paved
> runways. They are well suited to flying fields that allow takeoff
> and landing always directly into the wind.
>
> I read an analysis on RV's that changing from a tail dragger to a
> nose wheel configuration added a mere 2 miles per hour to a 200 mph plane.
>
> Given all that, I feel tricycle gear is a much better choice.
>
> Paul
> XL getting close
> do not archive
>
> At 06:41 PM 7/30/2008, you wrote:
> >I would not expect the interest to be as high in the tail dragger
> >version, but
> >I suspect that is because most learn to fly now in tricycle gear aircraft.
> >However, tailwheel aircraft usually have less drag and weight less. While
> >that might not be as important in many applications, for LSA, it seems to
>
> me
>
> >it should have a much greater level of consideration.
>
> 3D========================
>3D===================
> 3D========================
>3D===================
> 3D========================
>3D===================
> 3D========================
>3D===================
--
=============================================
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
================================================
Jim B. Belcher
BS, MS Physics, math, Computer Science
A&P/IA
Instrument Rated Pilot
General Radio Telephone Certificate
================================================
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 |
|
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 08:08:29AM -0500, Jim Belcher wrote:
> But it begs the original issue. Is the limited performance we have with LSAs
> such that we should seriously consider trimming all the weight and drag we
> can, to the extent of considering tail wheel aircraft?
Just how much does the 601's nose gear weigh?
One of the questions I was asked when I was getting insurance was whether
the airplane was a taildragger; it would have been significantly more
expensive if it had been. When you consider that the insurance industry
views LSAs with deep skepticism due to their accident rates, adding
taildragger into the mix would be a big hit.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC
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 |
|
jmaynard wrote:
> Just how much does the 601's nose gear weigh?
>
>
According to William Wynne the 601XL/TD he built didn't weigh that much more than
a tricycle geared version. Though he does add the caveat that the plane he
built did have some of the hardware already mounted. But not the gear and the
wheel/tire.
--------
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 2528#202528
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601/650 WING Construction DVD |
I see on the Zenith site that the list of one of the changes from the CH601XL to
the CH650 is that the wing angle of incidence has been changed. Could you elaborate
on this as to how that geometry pulled off?
Thanks
[quote="Jon(at)joncroke.com"]Now, it is ready!
The 601XL / CH650 WING construction double DVD video volume from HomebuiltHELP
is now being shipped.
Info is available at: http://www.homebuilthelp.com/CH601XL/601Wing.htm (http://www.homebuilthelp.com/CH601XL/601Wing.htm) (http://homebuilthelp.com/CH601XL/Htail.htm)
That's just about the complete set now finished for the 601/650.
We hope to get a final volume covering the rigging of the control cables, wings,
wires, etc out in a few months or so.
Looking forward to seeing ALL of you at the Zenith Fly-in, in just a couple weeks...
will have a table there.. stop by and say hello!
Visit: http://zenithair.com/news/oh2008.html (http://zenithair.com/news/oh2008.html)
Jon
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 2530#202530
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: 601/650 WING Construction DVD |
As far as the kit goes... new fuse side skins and other related parts are
fabricatred/drilled to accommodate the desired wing angle.. For more
perspective, review the summary of component changes for the CH650 in the
docuement located in the builders area on Zenith's site.
----- Original Message -----
From: "ashontz" <ashontz@nbme.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:47 AM
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: 601/650 WING Construction DVD
>
> I see on the Zenith site that the list of one of the changes from the
> CH601XL to the CH650 is that the wing angle of incidence has been changed.
> Could you elaborate on this as to how that geometry pulled off?
>
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: New Rudder Question |
Dave, that was my question exactly. I just e-mailed Sebastien to see if I could
have a peek at the wing structure pdf. That's the only significant change on
the list, and honestly, it's a huge change. Changing the angle of incidence is
no small change. How would one go about doing that if say you left the XL wing
structure alone but actually tilted the wing back a few degrees. And how much
would you need to tilt it back before it really made a noticable difference?
[quote="planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co"]does the wing still have the forward angled
main spar and the slight forward sweep like the old one?
David L. Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA, USA
--- On Tue, 8/5/08, Jay Maynard wrote:
[quote]From: Jay Maynard
Subject: Re: Re: New Rudder Question
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:58:14AM -0700, Walter Carey wrote:
> I think the model number change (650 vs 601) is just a way for Zenith to
> distance itself from the concern over the rumored wing problem (nothing
> proven to date).
>
>
Not even that...just a way to get press. "Hey, we've introduced a new
model!"
The only structural differences are the new rudder, the new canopy and
turtledeck, and the wing angle of incidence was very slightly adjusted to
lower the nose a tad.
> I like the new canopy latching system and think it can be adapted to a 601
> that still has the canopy under construction. It wouldn't have a split
> canopy, but the new latching system looks like it could be used on the old
> type one-piece canopy. Any thoughts/ideas on adapting the new latching
> system to a 601? Looks pretty straight forward to me.
>
>
My 601 has the new latch. Works fine. It was reported here recently that
they're developing a retrofit kit.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 2540#202540
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601/650 WING Construction DVD |
I already looked there. I'd like to see what the plans themselves look like in
that area. Do you have any pdf files of the wing structure and center fuselage
structure where the wings attach? I'd be really interested as to what that looks
like on the plans.
Thanks
Jon(at)joncroke.com wrote:
> As far as the kit goes... new fuse side skins and other related parts are
> fabricatred/drilled to accommodate the desired wing angle.. For more
> perspective, review the summary of component changes for the CH650 in the
> docuement located in the builders area on Zenith's site.
>
> ---
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 2544#202544
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: New Rudder Question |
Andy, they are huge changes in terms of the ripple effects. I do not have t
he expertise to adequately assess them though. I will be lurking here to se
e what comes out.
David L. Downey Harleysville-(SE) PA, USA
--- On Thu, 9/4/08, ashontz <ashontz@nbme.org> wrote:
From: ashontz <ashontz@nbme.org>
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: New Rudder Question
<ashontz@nbme.org>
Dave, that was my question exactly. I just e-mailed Sebastien to see if I c
ould
have a peek at the wing structure pdf. That's the only significant change o
n
the list, and honestly, it's a huge change. Changing the angle of incidence
is no small change. How would one go about doing that if say you left the X
L
wing structure alone but actually tilted the wing back a few degrees. And h
ow
much would you need to tilt it back before it really made a noticable
difference?
[quote="planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co"]does the wing still have the
forward angled main spar and the slight forward sweep like the old one?
David L. Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA, USA
--- On Tue, 8/5/08, Jay Maynard wrote:
[quote]From: Jay Maynard
Subject: Re: Re: New Rudder Question
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:58:14AM -0700, Walter Carey wrote:
> I think the model number change (650 vs 601) is just a way for Zenith to
> distance itself from the concern over the rumored wing problem (nothing
> proven to date).
>
>
Not even that...just a way to get press. "Hey, we've introduced a new
model!"
The only structural differences are the new rudder, the new canopy and
turtledeck, and the wing angle of incidence was very slightly adjusted to
lower the nose a tad.
> I like the new canopy latching system and think it can be adapted to a
601
> that still has the canopy under construction. It wouldn't have a
split
> canopy, but the new latching system looks like it could be used on the
old
> type one-piece canopy. Any thoughts/ideas on adapting the new latching
> system to a 601? Looks pretty straight forward to me.
>
>
My 601 has the new latch. Works fine. It was reported here recently that
they're developing a retrofit kit.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 2540#202540
=0A=0A=0A
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: | 601XL TD for sale - Steal it for $65,000 |
Hi gang,
I watched this aircraft being built, excellent craftsmanship. A steal
at $65,000 FIRM.
60 hrs. SMOH Lycoming 0-235L2C, 60 hrs. TTAF, Prop: Prince Ptip
composit covered. Flight Deck 180. Leather interior. Garmin 396 W/Panel
Dock + XM. Garmin SL 40 W/Intercom. Garmin GTX 327 W/AKA-350 Encoder.
Aircraft hangared at 1T7 (about 20 miles north of San Antonio, TX).
Call Jim Dunham at 972-825-3967.
--
Leo Gates
N601Z - CH601HDS TD
Rotax 912UL
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: | Project Almost Done - Cleaning House... |
After over 10 years I'm almost done with my Zodiac 601HDS project (yes,
HDS) and I'm cleaning out/selling off the extras to make a little piece
in the family...
I've put up 2 Electric Gyros Indicators on eBay if anyone is interested:
RCA15AK-1 14V Electric Directional Gyro (Lighted)
http://tinyurl.com/6n66vm
RCA26AK-1 14V Electric Attitude Indicator Gyro (Lighted)
http://tinyurl.com/5nnfuu
Both are brand new, have zero hours and were bought at R.C. Allen Booth
at Oshkosh.
Don Honabach
Tempe, AZ
601HDS
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 |
|
On Thursday 04 September 2008 10:41, Gig Giacona wrote:
>
> jmaynard wrote:
> > Just how much does the 601's nose gear weigh?
>
> According to William Wynne the 601XL/TD he built didn't weigh that much
> more than a tricycle geared version. Though he does add the caveat that the
> plane he built did have some of the hardware already mounted. But not the
> gear and the wheel/tire.
I'm not sure I understand ... do you mean the TD weighed more than the
tricycle version? I would have expected the reverse. If the coventional gear
weighs more than the tricycle gear, then the choice would be more obvious.
I have asked Zenith the question about conventional gear vs tricycle gear
weight, and was told I'd get an answer right after Osh. It may be that
everyone is busy with the new variant coming out, but so far, I don't have an
answer.
--
=============================================
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
================================================
Jim B. Belcher
BS, MS Physics, math, Computer Science
A&P/IA
Instrument Rated Pilot
General Radio Telephone Certificate
================================================
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! --
|