Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:54 AM - Fastening question (Bob Gibfried)
2. 07:15 AM - Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... (n801bh@netzero.com)
3. 08:18 AM - Re: Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... (Randall Hebert)
4. 08:57 AM - Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... (edleg)
5. 10:17 AM - 701/rotax battery cables (Craig Payne)
6. 10:17 AM - Re: Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... (Keith Ashcraft)
7. 11:40 AM - Re: 701/rotax battery cables (Les Goldner)
8. 11:48 AM - Re: 701/rotax battery cables (Craig Payne)
9. 03:20 PM - Re: Alaska CH701 NTSB Report (AllIn)
10. 06:17 PM - Re: 701/rotax battery cables (Les Goldner)
11. 06:17 PM - Re: parting out Zenair 701 on amphibian floats (Mark Colbeck)
12. 07:16 PM - Re: 701/rotax battery cables (NYTerminat@aol.com)
13. 07:17 PM - Re: VHF & Transponder separation requirements on 701 (BokKat)
14. 07:17 PM - Re: 701/rotax battery cables (Craig Payne)
15. 07:17 PM - Re: Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... (n801bh@netzero.com)
16. 07:48 PM - Re: Re: parting out Zenair 701 on amphibian floats (ces701@aol.com)
17. 10:20 PM - Re: 701 folding wing retrofit. (Gary Gower)
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: | Fastening question |
Have been unable to find an answer to this question.
Am using J nuts??, a spring clip sheet metal screw fastener to secure my
cowl. How far should the tip of the screw protrude through the clop to be
secure? Don't want it to be unnecessarily long and sure don't want it to be
too short.
Any suggestions?
Thanks, Bob, Wichita
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: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... |
This posting that was on the internet was forwarded to me by several fri
ends.......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
On the "801"
=93This is an accident waiting to happen. The motor mount is incorrectly
designed with un triangulated bays and bent tubes in tension and compre
ssion. The firewall forward weight is at least 450 pounds aluminum block
or no aluminum block. No mention is made of beefing up the fuselage to
take the vastly increased bending loads during landing and high G turns
not to mention the increased bending loads on the wing spars. Zenairs ar
e not over designed to begin with having very thin skins.
"The fuel burn is better then expected though and I am presently confirm
ing the JPI 450 for accuracy. Cruise @ 11,000 msl is producing 5.9 0 -6.
3 gallons an hour."
The numbers quoted above shows a lack of understanding about engine engi
neering in general. The fuel burn quoted at 6 gallons an hour or 37 poun
ds an hour means the engine is only generating 83 HP giving it the benef
it of a BSFC number of .45. In the unlikely event the BSFC is as low as
.40 the HP then would be 93 HP at the absolute maximum. Now you have a 4
50 pound firewall forward weight putting out 93 HP at cruise.
Something is seriously wrong.
"The numbers I am shooting for are one pound of engine weight for each
horsepower and a small total engine profile that will fit in most airfr
ames."
What he is saying here is he things he is going to get 350 to 400 HP wit
h a 1.43:1 PSRU ratio. With a 2600 RPM prop that is 3700 engine RPM. No
way is that going to happen.
This person is totally clueless.
I am really worried here. Probably one of the most dangerous airplanes
I have seen in a very long time.
Paul Lamar=94
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know who this "person" is or what his qualifications, but..
I am compelled to answer his hatchet job on every topic.
My project is a one of a kind. I had no group, forum or any other source
to go to during the design, and test flying of my experimental aircraft
, so all the calculations, fabrications and installations are a one off
and done to the best of my ability using past life experiences from fabr
icating stuff on race boats, cars and god only knows whatever I have mod
ified in earlier years.
I built my plane, 3000 + hours of MY time. I didn't but a half built one
, or a completed one to use a test bed for my powerplant. I have been fl
ying for almost 30 years and owned several other planes.
My experimental plane has been flying for 5 years and 300 hours. Bee
n flown in air from 97f to -37f. Has over 500 landing, been flown from
JAC, 6430 msl to 18,000 feet, full throttle, !! over a couple of dozen
times to test it for strength. Been flown in all other power settings to
comfirm and quantify data. Tested to +3.5g's to - 2.5 g's. Flown to OSH
and back... not trucked there as others seem to do to display their cre
ations.
My responses..
1- When is this " accident" going to happen ??
2- The mount is designed by me using triangulation, just go to my web si
te and look at the pics.
3- There are NO bent tubes in my mount. there are intersecting angles bu
t that happens on ALL mounts. At those intersections the area is beefed
up internally. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean crap.
4- I know EXACTLY what it weighs. I don't guess like he seems to. And it
is less then his "estimation"
5- Of course I beefed up the airframe as I built it. Just because I didn
't state that on my website should not give him a pass at a free shot.
6- Zenith Aircraft seem to be an "issue" to him. Mine has twice the "su
ggested" HP and still has not broken in half.
7- The plane has so much power that at cruise I can throttle back to ALO
T.. A 801 has alot of aerodynamic drag. I can run 90@ 6.4 GPH or 110@ 17
GPH. The plane hits a brick wall so why burn three times the fuel to go
a little faster. If I wanted to go fast I would have built another type
plane. You would think a guy like him could draw a simple conclusion.
8- I have probably built, raced and tested more engines hen he can dream
about.
9- BSFC of .45 ??? Jeez. I would be embarrased to tune a motor that ri
ch.
10- Nothing is " seriously wrong"............. I am seriously throttled
back.
11- The motor is capable of 600 + Hp in different trim. ie, different re
drive ratio, different intake design, etc. The motor will not gain any m
ore weight by changing componants, so 350-400 Hp is a no brainer.. On MY
plane I purposely stayed with 1.43-1 because it for sure doen not need
any more power.
12- Where did he get the 3700 RPM # from ? I turn the motor alot highe
r then that on take off. Yeah, the prop is kinda noisy but nothing worse
then what noise a seaplane makes with a large diameter prop.
13- """ Totally Clueless""" Ya wanna bet..
And in closing all I can add is
" I am really worried here. Probably one of the most dangerous airplanes
I have seen in a very long time. "
Geez... Where was he 5 years and 300 hours ago ??????.
Ben Haas.
____________________________________________________________
Top brands, low prices. Find the right air conditioner for you. Click No
w!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYTR2QuMdOBBTKfyt69B
KpSiFKAwnDrtGnv4DF0xHGGvcELmhwqoww/
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... |
Great response Ben.
The internet gives "experts" a place to vent.
I usually ignore their tirades but, like you, they sometimes get my goat.
Randall J Hebert
701 plans building
N7701P Reserved
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
n801bh@netzero.com
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 9:06 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar...
This posting that was on the internet was forwarded to me by several
friends.......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
On the "801"
"This is an accident waiting to happen. The motor mount is incorrectly
designed with un triangulated bays and bent tubes in tension and
compression. The firewall forward weight is at least 450 pounds aluminum
block or no aluminum block. No mention is made of beefing up the fuselage to
take the vastly increased bending loads during landing and high G turns not
to mention the increased bending loads on the wing spars. Zenairs are not
over designed to begin with having very thin skins.
"The fuel burn is better then expected though and I am presently confirming
the JPI 450 for accuracy. Cruise @ 11,000 msl is producing 5.9 0 -6.3
gallons an hour."
The numbers quoted above shows a lack of understanding about engine
engineering in general. The fuel burn quoted at 6 gallons an hour or 37
pounds an hour means the engine is only generating 83 HP giving it the
benefit of a BSFC number of .45. In the unlikely event the BSFC is as low as
.40 the HP then would be 93 HP at the absolute maximum. Now you have a 450
pound firewall forward weight putting out 93 HP at cruise.
Something is seriously wrong.
"The numbers I am shooting for are one pound of engine weight for each
horsepower and a small total engine profile that will fit in most
airframes."
What he is saying here is he things he is going to get 350 to 400 HP with a
1.43:1 PSRU ratio. With a 2600 RPM prop that is 3700 engine RPM. No way is
that going to happen.
This person is totally clueless.
I am really worried here. Probably one of the most dangerous airplanes I
have seen in a very long time.
Paul Lamar"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know who this "person" is or what his qualifications, but..
I am compelled to answer his hatchet job on every topic.
My project is a one of a kind. I had no group, forum or any other source to
go to during the design, and test flying of my experimental aircraft, so all
the calculations, fabrications and installations are a one off and done to
the best of my ability using past life experiences from fabricating stuff on
race boats, cars and god only knows whatever I have modified in earlier
years.
I built my plane, 3000 + hours of MY time. I didn't but a half built one, or
a completed one to use a test bed for my powerplant. I have been flying for
almost 30 years and owned several other planes.
My experimental plane has been flying for 5 years and 300 hours. Been
flown in air from 97f to -37f. Has over 500 landing, been flown from JAC,
6430 msl to 18,000 feet, full throttle, !! over a couple of dozen times to
test it for strength. Been flown in all other power settings to comfirm and
quantify data. Tested to +3.5g's to - 2.5 g's. Flown to OSH and back... not
trucked there as others seem to do to display their creations.
My responses..
1- When is this " accident" going to happen ??
2- The mount is designed by me using triangulation, just go to my web site
and look at the pics.
3- There are NO bent tubes in my mount. there are intersecting angles but
that happens on ALL mounts. At those intersections the area is beefed up
internally. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean crap.
4- I know EXACTLY what it weighs. I don't guess like he seems to. And it is
less then his "estimation"
5- Of course I beefed up the airframe as I built it. Just because I didn't
state that on my website should not give him a pass at a free shot.
6- Zenith Aircraft seem to be an "issue" to him. Mine has twice the
"suggested" HP and still has not broken in half.
7- The plane has so much power that at cruise I can throttle back to ALOT..
A 801 has alot of aerodynamic drag. I can run 90@ 6.4 GPH or 110@ 17 GPH.
The plane hits a brick wall so why burn three times the fuel to go a little
faster. If I wanted to go fast I would have built another type plane. You
would think a guy like him could draw a simple conclusion.
8- I have probably built, raced and tested more engines hen he can dream
about.
9- BSFC of .45 ??? Jeez. I would be embarrased to tune a motor that rich.
10- Nothing is " seriously wrong"............. I am seriously throttled
back.
11- The motor is capable of 600 + Hp in different trim. ie, different
redrive ratio, different intake design, etc. The motor will not gain any
more weight by changing componants, so 350-400 Hp is a no brainer.. On MY
plane I purposely stayed with 1.43-1 because it for sure doen not need any
more power.
12- Where did he get the 3700 RPM # from ? I turn the motor alot higher
then that on take off. Yeah, the prop is kinda noisy but nothing worse then
what noise a seaplane makes with a large diameter prop.
13- """ Totally Clueless""" Ya wanna bet..
And in closing all I can add is
" I am really worried here. Probably one of the most dangerous airplanes I
have seen in a very long time. "
Geez... Where was he 5 years and 300 hours ago ??????.
Ben Haas.
____________________________________________________________
Top brands, low prices. Find the right air conditioner for you.
<http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2242/fc/BLSrjpYTR2QuMdOBBTKfyt69BKpS
iFKAwnDrtGnv4DF0xHGGvcELmhwqoww/> Click Now!
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: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... |
PL has a lot of IDEAS and has even patented a lot of his IDEAS. In the Mazda rotary
conversion world he is always beating up on SUCCESSFUL rotary conversions
that have been flying for years with hundreds of hours in service. He seems to
be the guy that knows everything, and if you don't do it HIS way, then you are
a dingbat. I am not sure what he has actually BUILT that flys. Just ignore
him like most of the rotary conversion world does.
Ben, btw... that a great looking 801 and I bet it sounds great. Flying from a high
altitude airport you need all the hp you can get...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262422#262422
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: | 701/rotax battery cables |
I'm planning the electrical system on my 701 with a Rotax 912, no BRS. My
understanding is that the conventional setup for this configuration is to
place the battery behind the seats. I'm wondering about the gauge of the
cables that run up to the engine. My questions are:
- what gauge cable? The diagrams in the AeroElectric book call out 4 gauge.
Anyone using less, say 6 gauge? I could save a little weight here.
- dedicated ground cable or ground through the airframe? Again looking to
save weight.
-- Craig
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: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... |
Hey Ben,
You also didn't mention that the "ORANGE" paint is also contributive to your results
!!!!
(still building away on my 701, nothing happens fast when your TDY so much (100days
this year, so far))
(TDY = work related travel, for those of you that get the pleasure of staying home!!!)
Keith
CH701 - scratch
N 38.9940
W 105.1305
Alt. 9,100'
*********************************************************
________________________________
From: edleg <ed_legault@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 9:56:19 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar...
PL has a lot of IDEAS and has even patented a lot of his IDEAS. In the Mazda rotary
conversion world he is always beating up on SUCCESSFUL rotary conversions
that have been flying for years with hundreds of hours in service. He seems to
be the guy that knows everything, and if you don't do it HIS way, then you are
a dingbat. I am not sure what he has actually BUILT that flys. Just ignore
him like most of the rotary conversion world does.
Ben, btw... that a great looking 801 and I bet it sounds great. Flying from a high
altitude airport you need all the hp you can get...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262422#262422
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: | 701/rotax battery cables |
Craig,
Use 4 gauge welding cable since its more flexible. Don't skimp on cable size
unless you want problems starting or the potential of a fire! If you want to
get technical you can figure out how much heat and voltage loss you are
willing to accept. This depends upon the full-load current used by the
starter and the size and length of the cable; but I would just stick with
what we know works. There are better ways of saving weigh without risk (like
not using the heavy door handle/locks provided in my kit by Zenith).
Les
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 9:51 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<craig@craigandjean.com>
I'm planning the electrical system on my 701 with a Rotax 912, no BRS. My
understanding is that the conventional setup for this configuration is to
place the battery behind the seats. I'm wondering about the gauge of the
cables that run up to the engine. My questions are:
- what gauge cable? The diagrams in the AeroElectric book call out 4 gauge.
Anyone using less, say 6 gauge? I could save a little weight here.
- dedicated ground cable or ground through the airframe? Again looking to
save weight.
-- Craig
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: | 701/rotax battery cables |
Thanks Les. So do you have one or two cables (plus and ground) in your 701?
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les
Goldner
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<lgold@quantum-associates.com>
Craig,
Use 4 gauge welding cable since its more flexible. Don't skimp on cable size
unless you want problems starting or the potential of a fire! If you want to
get technical you can figure out how much heat and voltage loss you are
willing to accept. This depends upon the full-load current used by the
starter and the size and length of the cable; but I would just stick with
what we know works. There are better ways of saving weigh without risk (like
not using the heavy door handle/locks provided in my kit by Zenith).
Les
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 9:51 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<craig@craigandjean.com>
I'm planning the electrical system on my 701 with a Rotax 912, no BRS. My
understanding is that the conventional setup for this configuration is to
place the battery behind the seats. I'm wondering about the gauge of the
cables that run up to the engine. My questions are:
- what gauge cable? The diagrams in the AeroElectric book call out 4 gauge.
Anyone using less, say 6 gauge? I could save a little weight here.
- dedicated ground cable or ground through the airframe? Again looking to
save weight.
-- Craig
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: Alaska CH701 NTSB Report |
Tom P wrote:
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 090715X15408&key=1
I have learned about Paul's tragic accident this morning.
After passing my PPL checkride last year in December and buying myself a Diamond
DA40 in California I relied on Paul to help me getting my new aircraft safely
over to the East Coast. I have had the best days of my life, flying 30kts-crosswind
landings, stalls and flying over the rockies, through Monument Valley
and endless plains.
In these three days of our trip, I learned many things any other instructor wouldn't
have been able to show me. Paul was a great instructor, pilot, aviator and
person and I hoped to get some classes in mountain flying, when his wife answered
my email informing me here in Spain 5000 miles away and 2 months late about
his unexpected death.
Paul flying my plane....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQAiWGD01QU
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262487#262487
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/paul_800x600_116.jpg
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: | 701/rotax battery cables |
I used two cables from the battery Craig. I have found that the causes of
most electrical problems with instruments and starting is a result of a bad
ground... So I added a really good ground buss on the firewall. I attached a
4-gauge cable from the battery to the ground buss and also from this buss to
the engine block. All my grounds terminate at this buss except for the ones
from the fuel tanks, which I grounded locally. This is also a good way to
eliminate radio static. I purchased the ground buss and most of my
electrical parts from B&C (see http://www.bandc.biz/search.aspx?find=ground)
but I'm certain you could buy a ground buss elsewhere.
It's also very important to both crimp and solder the 4-gauge wire
terminals. A bad electrical connection here can heat up enough to melt stuff
and start a fire.
Les
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:46 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<craig@craigandjean.com>
Thanks Les. So do you have one or two cables (plus and ground) in your 701?
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les
Goldner
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<lgold@quantum-associates.com>
Craig,
Use 4 gauge welding cable since its more flexible. Don't skimp on cable size
unless you want problems starting or the potential of a fire! If you want to
get technical you can figure out how much heat and voltage loss you are
willing to accept. This depends upon the full-load current used by the
starter and the size and length of the cable; but I would just stick with
what we know works. There are better ways of saving weigh without risk (like
not using the heavy door handle/locks provided in my kit by Zenith).
Les
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 9:51 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<craig@craigandjean.com>
I'm planning the electrical system on my 701 with a Rotax 912, no BRS. My
understanding is that the conventional setup for this configuration is to
place the battery behind the seats. I'm wondering about the gauge of the
cables that run up to the engine. My questions are:
- what gauge cable? The diagrams in the AeroElectric book call out 4 gauge.
Anyone using less, say 6 gauge? I could save a little weight here.
- dedicated ground cable or ground through the airframe? Again looking to
save weight.
-- Craig
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: parting out Zenair 701 on amphibian floats |
I am nearly complete on my 701 on wheels. How hard is the conversion to Amphibs?
And if you want to contact me off list on the cost my email is here
crookedcreek AT xplornet.com
--------
CH701
70% Complete
www.mykitlog.com/mcolbeck
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262501#262501
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: 701/rotax battery cables |
Craig,
I did the exact same as Les, except just crimped my connections. Works
great no problems, 180 hrs
Bob Spudis
N701ZX/912S
In a message dated 9/10/2009 9:17:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
lgold@quantum-associates.com writes:
used two cables from the battery Craig. I have found that the causes of
most electrical problems with instruments and starting is a result of a
bad
ground... So I added a really good ground buss on the firewall. I attached
a
4-gauge cable from the battery to the ground buss and also from this buss
to
the engine block. All my grounds terminate at this buss except for the ones
from the fuel tanks, which I grounded locally. This is also a good way to
eliminate radio static. I purchased the ground buss and most of my
electrical parts from B&C (see
http://www.bandc.biz/search.aspx?find=ground)
but I'm certain you could buy a ground buss elsewhere.
It's also very important to both crimp and solder the 4-gauge wire
terminals. A bad electrical connection here can heat up enough to melt
stuff
and start a fire.
Les
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: VHF & Transponder separation requirements on 701 |
You want to seperate your com antenna from the elt (assuming a 121.5 elt
- a 406/121.5 would be similar) by at least 1/4 wavelength at the com
frequencies. A rule of thumb is approximately the length of the
antenna, though farther away is better. I mounted mine as far rearward
on the top of the fuselage as I could comfortably reach through the
bottom of the 'hell hole!'
A transponder antenna is best on the belly of the plane, usually as far
forward as you can mount it, though anywhere as much out of the way of
obstructions like gear, etc. is OK. It is interrogated by ground
stations (excluding TCAS) so works better on the belly!
My 701, (like most) has a fiberglass cowling so I mounted it behind
where the aluminum on the belly starts, actually quite a way back come
to think of it......Actually I put it under the seat so as not to worry
about the connectors and coax being underfoot. Also, theoretically at
least, the transponder antenna should not be where it would be able to
radiate RF energy directly to you or especially your family jewels!
The aluminum seat bottom does a fine job of shielding any radiation in
or around the antenna base, so I put it there. The metal gear doesn't
interfere with radiation/operation of the XPDR.
My ELT antenna (406/121.5) I put halfway between the plastic BRS
blowout panel and rear of the windscreen to separate it far enough from
the VHF com antenna and to have the aluminum skin act as a ground plane.
Also, I'm a ham radio operator and so I put my 146 mhz 2 meter antenna
on the right side of that panel, and the ELT on the left.
The tail is supposedly better for an ELT as an antenna mounted on the
tail is generally a bit more clear to radiate than one mounted elsewhere
in most crashes. I always wonder why some company doesn't make two
antennas with one hookup to the ELT - one for the top, one for the
bottom of the fuselage, so you would always have one antenna to radiate.
With the CAP I once saw a crash that had flipped over and the elt
antenna was on the bottom and couldn't be heard until you flew over it
very low, and even the, barely.
Of course, with multiple antennas your airplane might look like a
porcupine with all those antennas and you might lose 40 of your blazing
60 knots! Hah!
----- Original Message -----
From: Stanley A Challgren
To: zenith zenith701801-list
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 11:35 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: VHF & Transponder separation requirements
on 701
Listees:
I am in the process of ordering my Garmin SL40 radio and GTX 330
Transponder and am unable to find minimum separation distances between
the two antennas. John at Stein Avionics seemed to think that 24" would
be sufficient. As I sit on my creeper in the hellhole I realize that
placing the antennas much more than arm's length away would not be
advisable. I also have to consider the location of the Magnetometer for
the Grand Rapids EFIS Sport.
I thought Bingelis would have the answer. If he did, I could not find
it. I also thought The AeroElectric Connection would have the answer.
Again, if it did; I could not find it. I remember reading about
radiating planes around antennas and needing them for maximum
communication distances but can't find the reference. I googled
Aircraft Antenna Locations and found "Mount the antennas at least 36
inches away from obstructions and as far as possible from other
antennas." It also said "On fabric covered aircraft...,it will be
necessary to provide a flat metallic surface or "ground plane"
extending at least 12 inches in all directions from the center of the
antenna."
Given the above background, I am considering mounting the VHF radio
antenna on the far starboard side of the tail section within arm's reach
of the Maintenance Access Opening (hellhole). I would mount the
transponder antenna on the other side, again right up next to the
vertical bulkhead. I would put the magnetometer between the two
antennas. The two antennas would be about 24" apart.
My question then is, from those who are flying their 701's: Is what I
suggest feasible, or; are you using a different plan that works?
All comments would be appreciated.
Confused in Colorado.
Stan Challgren
701/3300
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 |
|
| Subject: | 701/rotax battery cables |
Thanks, I have and will use the B&C ground block.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les
Goldner
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 7:10 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<lgold@quantum-associates.com>
I used two cables from the battery Craig. I have found that the causes of
most electrical problems with instruments and starting is a result of a bad
ground... So I added a really good ground buss on the firewall. I attached a
4-gauge cable from the battery to the ground buss and also from this buss to
the engine block. All my grounds terminate at this buss except for the ones
from the fuel tanks, which I grounded locally. This is also a good way to
eliminate radio static. I purchased the ground buss and most of my
electrical parts from B&C (see http://www.bandc.biz/search.aspx?find=ground)
but I'm certain you could buy a ground buss elsewhere.
It's also very important to both crimp and solder the 4-gauge wire
terminals. A bad electrical connection here can heat up enough to melt stuff
and start a fire.
Les
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:46 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<craig@craigandjean.com>
Thanks Les. So do you have one or two cables (plus and ground) in your 701?
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les
Goldner
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<lgold@quantum-associates.com>
Craig,
Use 4 gauge welding cable since its more flexible. Don't skimp on cable size
unless you want problems starting or the potential of a fire! If you want to
get technical you can figure out how much heat and voltage loss you are
willing to accept. This depends upon the full-load current used by the
starter and the size and length of the cable; but I would just stick with
what we know works. There are better ways of saving weigh without risk (like
not using the heavy door handle/locks provided in my kit by Zenith).
Les
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 9:51 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: 701/rotax battery cables
<craig@craigandjean.com>
I'm planning the electrical system on my 701 with a Rotax 912, no BRS. My
understanding is that the conventional setup for this configuration is to
place the battery behind the seats. I'm wondering about the gauge of the
cables that run up to the engine. My questions are:
- what gauge cable? The diagrams in the AeroElectric book call out 4 gauge.
Anyone using less, say 6 gauge? I could save a little weight here.
- dedicated ground cable or ground through the airframe? Again looking to
save weight.
-- Craig
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: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar... |
Thanks for the comments..
sound of it is here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOF6eT6FRmY.
Turn up the volume...
A detailed video or it is here. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=
-7272451917550730841&hl=en#..
Get a beer and watch it. my first time at this stuff so maybe two beers
would help. <GG>
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "edleg" <ed_legault@yahoo.com>
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: Zenith701801-List Paul Lamar...
PL has a lot of IDEAS and has even patented a lot of his IDEAS. In the M
azda rotary conversion world he is always beating up on SUCCESSFUL rotar
y conversions that have been flying for years with hundreds of hours in
service. He seems to be the guy that knows everything, and if you don't
do it HIS way, then you are a dingbat. I am not sure what he has actuall
y BUILT that flys. Just ignore him like most of the rotary conversion wo
rld does.
Ben, btw... that a great looking 801 and I bet it sounds great. Flying f
rom a high altitude airport you need all the hp you can get...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262422#262422
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
____________________________________________________________
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYSwrD1Lz352bnpsMwbM
A0pMxgjoI0zMu9SQXStmivrBRhWFAVDQys/
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: parting out Zenair 701 on amphibian floats |
Hi Mark
I built my 701 on wheels initially then converted to amphibian
after about 50 hours. the conversion is easy with the original gear arrangement.
What gear do you have? Here is a picture of my plane.I would be willing to sell
the floats for
a real attractive price. Let me know if you are interested.
Charlie
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Colbeck <mark@masterpieceliving.ca>
Sent: Thu, Sep 10, 2009 9:16 pm
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: parting out Zenair 701 on amphibian floats
I am nearly complete on my 701 on wheels. How hard is the conversion to Amphibs?
And if you want to contact me off list on the cost my email is here
crookedcreek AT xplornet.com
--------
CH701
70% Complete
www.mykitlog.com/mcolbeck
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=262501#262501
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: 701 folding wing retrofit. |
I am certainly not an expert in this, but I can imagine that there is some
diference in the Sun deterioration over fabric airplanes, depending in the
angle of the sun rays...- Alaska is Very far from the Ecuator...-
-
Well,- for our- Zenith aircraft (fortunate mine is always hangared by t
he way),- the only parts that could suffer mostly from UV rays could be t
he windshield and the tires, if your painting job is not that important for
you, probably also hail (ice balls?) over the thin skins.-
-
Is there an estimate data-of how much (months, years) could a windshield
keep clear enough for safe flying, -if kept outside in the sun (no shade)
?-
Sometime, I think, that a canopy cover in a windy day could harm more (scra
tches) the windshield, that keeping it uncovered.- Dirt can be removed wi
th lots of water, scratches could take a lot of carefull polishing in the p
reflight time :-( ...
-
Saludos
Gary Gower
Flying from Chapala, Mexico- (200 miles South of the Tropic of Cancer)
701 912S-- 261 hrs,- lots of hrs hangared during the week days :-(
601 XL Jab 3300 Building,--the wings :-))
-
-
--- On Mon, 8/24/09, Ken Ryan <keninalaska@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Ken Ryan <keninalaska@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: 701 folding wing retrofit
The Cub is the most popular plane up here. Many of those who can't afford a
PA-18 have Pacers, Tri-pacers, PA-12s and even Colts. The rag and tube Pip
ers are everywhere, and 99% of of them sit outside all of the time. I can't
tell you exactly how long the modern fabrics last, but a good fabric job d
efinitely lasts a long time. My guess would be 20-30 years would be quite c
ommon.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Bob Collins <bobcollins42@gmail.com> wrot
e:
m>
Ken,
Does this include fabric-covered planes such as Cubs? If so, I guess that t
hey just replace the covering more often.
Bob Collins
Sunnyvale CA USA
Ken Ryan wrote:
For what it's worth, here in the harsh Alaskan climate, where there are tho
usands and thousands of airplanes, nearly all of them are parked outside al
l year round. Rain, snow, sleet, wind, near constant sun in the summer, 20-
40 below in the winter ... you name it. Most people up here never even thin
k about hangaring their plane.
-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-Li
st
http://forums.matronics.com
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=0A=0A=0A
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! --
|