---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith701801-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 05/14/10: 8 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:32 AM - Re: Re: Gear fitting dimension (John Bolding) 2. 08:36 AM - Re: Re: Gear fitting dimension (JohnDRead@aol.com) 3. 10:54 AM - Bernoulli or Newton? (Jeffrey A Beachy) 4. 11:47 AM - Re: Bernoulli or Newton? (Larry McFarland) 5. 12:06 PM - Re: Bernoulli or Newton? (MIKE JEFFERSON) 6. 04:55 PM - Re: How an airplane flies (Keith Ashcraft) 7. 07:46 PM - Re: Bernoulli or Newton? (James Sagerser) 8. 08:49 PM - Re: Bernoulli or Newton? (JohnDRead@aol.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 05:32:56 AM PST US From: "John Bolding" Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Gear fitting dimension I understand that lateral positioning needs to be addressed, if you make the gear from alum, composites, marshmallows or unobtanium it's gotta be held in place, side to side , fore and aft, and restricted against rotation.. They are NOT consistent, that's why I'm asking, I've had almost a 1/4" difference so far on factory parts and slightly less on builder constructed pieces. You absolutely don't , under any circumstances, want to score the uni fibers in the gear, Composites 101. Thanks for your measurements. John Hi John; The notches provide the lateral positioning of the gear so they need to be there even with a composite part, I think that if they were made 75 mm apart that should be OK. The Gear Mounts are a substantial part and are probably welded in a fixture so I suspect they are pretty consistent. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 In a message dated 5/13/2010 5:01:53 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, jnbolding1@teleshare.net writes: In the middle of developing a glass gear for the 701 have hit a semi-snag. I've discovered what I believe to be a discrepancy in the plans and real life parts. I know that's hard to believe but I think it's true. --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 08:36:58 AM PST US From: JohnDRead@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Gear fitting dimension Hi John; I understand the need to keep from nicking composite structures. One dimension that may have a big variable is the lateral distance between the notches. Perhaps a grommet or O ring of hard urethane over the pins would fix the potential contact problem too. If the distance between the notches is not to variable perhaps a step with a curve to the in side would work then the width of the gear outboard of the clamps could be 75 mm or so and the section under the fuselage remain at 82 mm. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 In a message dated 5/14/2010 6:33:09 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, jnbolding1@teleshare.net writes: I understand that lateral positioning needs to be addressed, if you make the gear from alum, composites, marshmallows or unobtanium it's gotta be held in place, side to side , fore and aft, and restricted against rotation.. They are NOT consistent, that's why I'm asking, I've had almost a 1/4" difference so far on factory parts and slightly less on builder constructed pieces. You absolutely don't , under any circumstances, want to score the uni fibers in the gear, Composites 101. Thanks for your measurements. John Hi John; The notches provide the lateral positioning of the gear so they need to be there even with a composite part, I think that if they were made 75 mm apart that should be OK. The Gear Mounts are a substantial part and are probably welded in a fixture so I suspect they are pretty consistent. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 In a message dated 5/13/2010 5:01:53 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, jnbolding1@teleshare.net writes: In the middle of developing a glass gear for the 701 have hit a semi-snag. I've discovered what I believe to be a discrepancy in the plans and real life parts. I know that's hard to believe but I think it's true. --> _http://www.matronics.com/c_ (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 10:54:30 AM PST US Subject: Zenith701801-List: Bernoulli or Newton? From: Jeffrey A Beachy I was distressed some years ago when I discovered that airplanes fly mostly due to Newton's laws with very little lift attributable to Bernoulli's principle--all those years of grade school wasted! Bernoulli's principal helps a bit, but by far it is Newton's angle of attack "push" that keeps our wonderful Zenith's in the sky. One way to verify this is to look at an aerobatic airplane with symmetrical wings--if Bernoulli's principal is the reason airplanes fly, a symmetrical wing would not fly. Below is a report funded by NASA affirming that Newton's laws are the reason that airplanes fly. Jeff Beachy Plain City, OH http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airflylvl3.htm ____________________________________________________________ Penny Stock Soaring 3000% Sign up for Free to find out what the next 3000% Stock Winner Is! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4bed8de330c17d58cdm01vuc ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 11:47:16 AM PST US From: Larry McFarland Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Bernoulli or Newton? Hi Jeff, If you've ever seen rime ice formation on a symmetrical wing in flight, you'd notice the lift is well forward and lacking on the lower side which says, yes, angle of attack is part of it, but the principal of airflow distance over a wing is 90% main reason it flys at all. Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com do not archive Jeffrey A Beachy wrote: > I was distressed some years ago when I discovered that airplanes fly > mostly due to Newton's laws with very little lift attributable to > Bernoulli's principle--all those years of grade school wasted! > Bernoulli's principal helps a bit, but by far it is Newton's angle of > attack "push" that keeps our wonderful Zenith's in the sky. One way to > verify this is to look at an aerobatic airplane with symmetrical > wings--if Bernoulli's principal is the reason airplanes fly, a > symmetrical wing would not fly. Below is a report funded by NASA > affirming that Newton's laws are the reason that airplanes fly. > > Jeff Beachy > Plain City, OH > > *http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airflylvl3.htm* > ** > ** > * > * ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 12:06:25 PM PST US From: MIKE JEFFERSON Subject: RE: Zenith701801-List: Bernoulli or Newton? THE ONLY THING THAT KEEPS ME IN THE AIR I THINK IS FRANKLIN OR AT LEAST A W HOLE BUNCH OF HIS PIC=2CS MICHAEL P. N9805U > Date: Fri=2C 14 May 2010 13:46:37 -0500 > From: larry@macsmachine.com > To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Bernoulli or Newton? > ne.com> > > Hi Jeff=2C > If you've ever seen rime ice formation on a symmetrical wing in flight=2C > you'd notice the lift is well forward and lacking on the lower side > which says=2C yes=2C angle of attack is > part of it=2C but the principal of airflow distance over a wing is 90% > main reason it flys at all. > > Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com > do not archive > > Jeffrey A Beachy wrote: > > I was distressed some years ago when I discovered that airplanes fly > > mostly due to Newton's laws with very little lift attributable to > > Bernoulli's principle--all those years of grade school wasted! > > Bernoulli's principal helps a bit=2C but by far it is Newton's angle of > > attack "push" that keeps our wonderful Zenith's in the sky. One way to > > verify this is to look at an aerobatic airplane with symmetrical > > wings--if Bernoulli's principal is the reason airplanes fly=2C a > > symmetrical wing would not fly. Below is a report funded by NASA > > affirming that Newton's laws are the reason that airplanes fly. > > > > Jeff Beachy > > Plain City=2C OH > > > > *http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airflylvl3.htm* > > ** > > ** > > * > > * > > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > _________________________________________________________________ The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with H otmail. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid= PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5 ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 04:55:51 PM PST US From: Keith Ashcraft Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: How an airplane flies Well... it would be farther along if I wasn't TDY so much. I have been here at Dugway Proving Grounds, outside of Salt Lake since March 28th, so not a whole lot is being accomplished. Keith ****************************************************** ________________________________ From: "JohnDRead@aol.com" Sent: Thu, May 13, 2010 9:49:22 PM Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: How an airplane flies Hi Keith; How is your plane coming along? I have the engine on mine - there is still plenty to do though. do not archive Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 In a message dated 5/13/2010 9:19:24 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, ch701builder@yahoo.com writes: Hey John, >Educational... YES. > >I always thought that "MONEY" is > what made airplanes fly. The more you spend the higher and faster it > flies. > >Example: >$60,000 a fairly nice 12O MPH plane >$600,000 a > little bit faster plane >$6,000,000 a faster plane. >$60,000,000 .... you > get the picture ... > >... and so forth .... > > >Keith >CH701 - > scratch >(invested around $4,000 so far, so my plane DOESN'T fly...) >N 38.9940 >W > 105.1305 >Alt. 9,100' >Divide, > CO > >******************************************************** > > ________________________________ From: "JohnDRead@aol.com" > >To: > zenith701801-list@matronics.com >Sent: Thu, May 13, 2010 7:44:23 > PM >Subject: Re: > Zenith701801-List: How an airplane flies > >Well that was educational. Let's switch to which color Scotchbrite, VGs > and cheap rivets from China. Oh and let's not forget poorly flown aircraft > that break their wings. > >Regards, John > >CH701 - > Colorado - Jabiru 3300 > >Cell: 719-494-4567 >Home: 303-648-3261 > > > > > > >=================================== > >List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List=================================== >ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com >=================================== >tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=================================== > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:46:04 PM PST US Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Bernoulli or Newton? From: James Sagerser Jeff, Thanks so much for sharing the very informative article by the Allstar network. As a flight instructor for almost 40 years, it time to let go of the notion the "world is flat" and move on. Thanks again, Jim Sagerser On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Jeffrey A Beachy wrote: > I was distressed some years ago when I discovered that airplanes fly > mostly due to Newton's laws with very little lift attributable to > Bernoulli's principle--all those years of grade school wasted! Bernoulli's > principal helps a bit, but by far it is Newton's angle of attack "push" that > keeps our wonderful Zenith's in the sky. One way to verify this is to look > at an aerobatic airplane with symmetrical wings--if Bernoulli's principal is > the reason airplanes fly, a symmetrical wing would not fly. Below is a > report funded by NASA affirming that Newton's laws are the reason that > airplanes fly. > > Jeff Beachy > Plain City, OH > > *http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airflylvl3.htm* > ** > ** > > > ____________________________________________________________ > *Penny Stock Soaring 3000%* > Sign up for Free to find out what the next 3000% Stock Winner Is! > > PennyStocksUniverse.com > > * > > * > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:49:58 PM PST US From: JohnDRead@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Bernoulli or Newton? Thank you. I am pleased to see that I am not the only person who believes that Newton is what keeps us in the air. Larry - you have got to read and understand "Stick and Rudder" Even Sabrina will understand when she meets Dr. Drela at MIT. Congratulations girl! Regards, John Read CH701 Colorado Jabiru 3300 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message zenith701801-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Zenith701801-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/zenith701801-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/zenith701801-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.