Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:22 AM - 801BW is a float plane (Keystone Engineering LLC)
2. 08:57 AM - Re: 801BW is a float plane (MacDonald Doug)
3. 02:52 PM - CH701 Antennas install - backing plates (Keith Ashcraft)
4. 05:11 PM - Re: VW Conversion (kmccune)
5. 07:48 PM - Re: 701 vs 750 - useful load (kevinthorp)
6. 08:00 PM - Re: Re: 701 vs 750 - useful load (Craig Payne)
7. 08:04 PM - Re: Re: 701 vs 750 - useful load (Craig Payne)
8. 09:46 PM - Re: Re: 701 vs 750 - useful load (Joemotis@aol.com)
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: | 801BW is a float plane |
Hi
I finally got N801BW on floats and to the lake. As always there are some
initialization problems. It porpoises after landing, other than that it
jumps in to the air. At a very light weight it came right up on step. With
the Full Lotus floats there was not two rises just one and I had to push it
over onto the step. I only had time to find the sweet spot twice before I
was airborne. It was truly glassy water! It flies fine in the air. I only
had time to do two splash and dashes before it got dark.
Bill Wilcox
N801BW
On Floats!
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: 801BW is a float plane |
Bill, take care to monitor condensation buildup in the Full Lotus floats. After
one season I had to remove one litre of water from each bladder (8 in each float
for a total of two gallons of water). The poroising can be adjusted by moving
the floats forward and back a little to find the best balance point.
Doug MacDonald
CH-701 Scratch builder
NW Ontario
(former Full Lotus float owner)
Do Not Archive
--- On Fri, 8/15/08, Keystone Engineering LLC <keystone@gci.net> wrote:
> From: Keystone Engineering LLC <keystone@gci.net>
> Subject: Zenith701801-List: 801BW is a float plane
> To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
> Date: Friday, August 15, 2008, 10:21 AM
> Engineering LLC <keystone@gci.net>
>
> Hi
>
> I finally got N801BW on floats and to the lake. As always
> there are some
> initialization problems. It porpoises after landing, other
> than that it
> jumps in to the air. At a very light weight it came right
> up on step. With
> the Full Lotus floats there was not two rises just one and
> I had to push it
> over onto the step. I only had time to find the sweet spot
> twice before I
> was airborne. It was truly glassy water! It flies fine in
> the air. I only
> had time to do two splash and dashes before it got dark.
>
> Bill Wilcox
> N801BW
> On Floats!
>
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: | CH701 Antennas install - backing plates |
All,
Since I am working on my rear fuselage, I was wanting some input about
antenna locations and backing plates. I think it would be easier to prep
for antenna mounting now, instead of when everything is put together, in
the way, and not easy to reach. I have seen where the COMM antenna is at
the very back of the baggage compartment, then the cable runs through
the baggage back. This was done for easyness to reach the connector for
any work that needed to be done.
I am assuming a backing plate of around 0.032 or 0.040 and 3"x3" should
be enough for a whip comm antenna.
Also, where are some of your transponder antennas mounted? I also have
an extra tail/rear access panel, so mounting a transponder antenna
farther on the tail "should" be easy to do.
Pictures would be helpfull of your setups
Thanks,
Keith
CH701 -- scratch (slow going, -- too much TDY -- work related travel)
N 38.9940
W 105.1305
Alt. 9,100' (possible SNOW tonight)
http://picasaweb.google.com/ch701builder/SN4765
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be proprietary and are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
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 Corporation. The
recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
ITT accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted
by this e-mail.
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: VW Conversion |
>From what I've read, no personal experience. The problem is that the VW to get
that hp for take off, has to turn quite a lot of RPM, also for fast cruise.
This makes a lot of heat and the cowl/ baffling needs to be very good to take
away that heat. The 701 is a slow draggy machine. It requires a lot of (relatively)
power to go 80mph for example. So it is creating a lot of heat and is not
getting as much air flowing past it as a cleaner airframe would for the same
power setting.
I do think think they will work, but you need to be careful of the throttle setting.
Kinda like a 912's 5 min full power limit right [Wink]
But for toodleing around and just having fun in the flat lands, I think its fine.
Just check the jugs every once in awhile.
Kevin
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that
you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198831#198831
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: 701 vs 750 - useful load |
craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:
> A middle ground would be to fly the 750 with a Jabiru 3300. -- Craig
>
> --
That would gain more useful load over a Cont engine, but wouldn't it also shift
the CG back, reducing the baggage you could carry?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198867#198867
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: 701 vs 750 - useful load |
I don't know. I suspect the motor mount for the Jabiru places the engine's
CG farther forward than the mount for the Cont. I believe a 601XL with a
Jabiru can carry just as much baggage as an XL with a heavier engine.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
kevinthorp
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 8:49 PM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: 701 vs 750 - useful load
<thorp.kevin@gmail.com>
craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:
> A middle ground would be to fly the 750 with a Jabiru 3300. -- Craig
>
> --
That would gain more useful load over a Cont engine, but wouldn't it also
shift the CG back, reducing the baggage you could carry?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198867#198867
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: 701 vs 750 - useful load |
Also on the XL with the Jabiru 3300 the battery is mounted on the firewall.
On heavier engines the battery commonly goes behind the seat or in the tail.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
kevinthorp
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 8:49 PM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: 701 vs 750 - useful load
<thorp.kevin@gmail.com>
craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:
> A middle ground would be to fly the 750 with a Jabiru 3300. -- Craig
>
> --
That would gain more useful load over a Cont engine, but wouldn't it also
shift the CG back, reducing the baggage you could carry?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198867#198867
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: 701 vs 750 - useful load |
How about a 750 with a Raven redrive on the big fuel injected Suzuki 1.3 , I
believe the 1998 model year is the optimum.?
Is any one running this in a CH 701? How much does the engine and cooling
system with coolant in it weigh?
As in a number one could use as a benchmark.
Thanks
Joe Motis
Do not archive
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
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! --
|