Zenith CH-701 thread

[bexrbetter]

Dont fret its a common issue.

Yeah don't worry at all guys, front wheels falling off, phhhhtttt, when we were young we couldn't afford front wheels, lucky bastards ...

 

Are you serious??

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Hi derek

 

Here is a couple of links the last one gives explanations and at the bottom a video of what nearly happened to me at the 7 hr of first flying the Sav. This may be similar to what happened to you. marty this may be good for you to look at as well. Main issue is do not land htese types too fast as they maybe on the ground but still flying by a long way and can wheelbarrow very easily

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/another-new-savannah-xl-on-its-way.10493/page-35

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/savannah-incident-at-caboolture.67974/

 

Mark

 

 

[Marty_d]

Hi derekHere is a couple of links the last one gives explanations and at the bottom a video of what nearly happened to me at the 7 hr of first flying the Sav. This may be similar to what happened to you. marty this may be good for you to look at as well. Main issue is do not land htese types too fast as they maybe on the ground but still flying by a long way and can wheelbarrow very easily

 

Mark

Thanks for that Mark.

 

when we were young we couldn't afford front wheels, lucky bastards ...

Taildraggers - explained!

 

 

[peter2480]

If it's not to late I have one in the Ballina Byron Bay area

Roxy,

I have recently become keenly interested in Zen 601 and 701. Are you still in Ballina area. I am close by in Lismore area.

 

Peter

 

 

[peter2480]

If it's not to late I have one in the Ballina Byron Bay area

Roxy,

I have recently become keenly interested in Zen 601 and 701. Are you still in Ballina area. I am close by in Lismore area.

 

Peter

 

 

[Marty_d]

Second wing done!!! That leaves... er... (counting on fingers)... zero wings still to build!

 

 

 

 

[eightyknots]

Good job; what is next to be built?

 

 

[Marty_d]

Thanks 80kts.

 

Slats and flaperons next I think... should be a bit simpler than the wings, in the instructions there's only 39 pages combined for them (as opposed to 178 pages for the wings).

 

Mind you then comes the fuselage which is half the bloody book.... but as my wife said to cheer me up, "You had to build 2 wings, you only have to build 1 fuselage!"

 

 

[Nobody]

"You had to build 2 wings, you only have to build 1 fuselage!"

This has to be the most optimistic comment on building an aeroplane i have read. Awesome...

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Marty

 

When you are finished the fuselage THEN you have 90% to go .....well it feels that way anyway

 

 

[Marty_d]

Yeah... I am NOT looking forward to all the fiddly bits with instruments, engine and controls.

 

 

[rankamateur]

Yeah... I am NOT looking forward to all the fiddly bits with instruments, engine and controls.

It gets a bit daunting about then. Been there for about six months. Just takes a couple of little set backs at this stage to really put you off. Even RAA pissing you off is enough to do it.

 

 

[eightyknots]

.... but as my wife said to cheer me up, "You had to build 2 wings, you only have to build 1 fuselage!"

Haha, that's awesome! A medal for her fantastic positive outlook on life!!

 

 

[Marty_d]

This has to be the most optimistic comment on building an aeroplane i have read. Awesome...

Haha, that's awesome! A medal for her fantastic positive outlook on life!!

Thanks guys, I've forwarded your comments to her!

 

 

[eightyknots]

Second wing done!!! That leaves... er... (counting on fingers)... zero wings still to build![ATTACH=full]37930[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]37931[/ATTACH]

Just wondering, Marty, is your SavZenith CH 701 going to have slats? ...or are you planning to fit JG3's vortex generators? see: stolspeed.com

 

 

[Marty_d]

Just wondering, Marty, is your SavZenith CH 701 going to have slats? ...or are you planning to fit JG3's vortex generators? see: stolspeed.com

I've read JG's stuff, but I just can't get it thru my head that a wing designed to have slats (which substantially changes the airfoil at normal speeds) should fly the same or better, at all speeds and AOA's, without them - VG's or not. So yes, I'm going to stick with the original plans. Chris Heintz worked on the Concorde for dog's sake, I reckon he knew what he was doing.

 

One bloke in the States built his wing without slats but with the equivalent airfoil if you included them (much like the 750 Cruzer, and well before it was released). That seems more logical to me than having a very blunt nose section with vg's - but then again, if you were going that route, you're not really after a STOL aircraft at all so why not build something pretty?

 

 

[eightyknots]

I've read JG's stuff, but I just can't get it thru my head that a wing designed to have slats (which substantially changes the airfoil at normal speeds) should fly the same or better, at all speeds and AOA's, without them - VG's or not. So yes, I'm going to stick with the original plans. Chris Heintz worked on the Concorde for dog's sake, I reckon he knew what he was doing.One bloke in the States built his wing without slats but with the equivalent airfoil if you included them (much like the 750 Cruzer, and well before it was released). That seems more logical to me than having a very blunt nose section with vg's - but then again, if you were going that route, you're not really after a STOL aircraft at all so why not build something pretty?

JG3's Savannah "Classic" plane had a NACA wing profile near identical to the CH-701's profile. He removed the slats and installed vortex generators and it seemed to improve performance in almost everything except that the stall speed rose by a couple of knots. The trade-off was that he got better fuel economy and a higher cruise speed. JG3 never changed the profile on his wing. I have been for a flight in his plane and, as far as I could tell, it flew very well. Not changing the profile seems to be of no concern.

 

 

[eightyknots]

I am not sure if you explored this thread but that has some different points of view with respect to VGs, mainly from Down Under: http://www.zenith.aero/forum/topics/fly-ch701-without-slats?id=2606393%3ATopic%3A112453&page=1#comments

 

 

[Marty_d]

I am not sure if you explored this thread but that has some different points of view with respect to VGs, mainly from Down Under: http://www.zenith.aero/forum/topics/fly-ch701-without-slats?id=2606393:Topic:112453&page=1#comments

I did. I'm not in the least doubting JG's results, and good on him for being innovative. My only point is that Chris Heintz designed the plane to have slats and I'm not confident enough to remove them, and removing them may have unexpected consequences under some conditions.

 

Regarding the thread you refer to, did you see the last comment?

 

" I flew mine for the first few months with no slats,not sure about the legal aspects,but be wary of your stall characteristics.Mine became very violent."

 

 

[eightyknots]

I did. I'm not in the least doubting JG's results, and good on him for being innovative. My only point is that Chris Heintz designed the plane to have slats and I'm not confident enough to remove them, and removing them may have unexpected consequences under some conditions.Regarding the thread you refer to, did you see the last comment?

" I flew mine for the first few months with no slats,not sure about the legal aspects,but be wary of your stall characteristics.Mine became very violent."

Yes, I did read that. He seems to be the lone voice in that thread. However, I have read quite a few threads which seems to indicate the benefits of VGs the other way, i.e., that the stall characteristics for the CH-701 are better, that is, more benign with vortex generators. I also take on board your comment that you want to stick with the designer's design principles.

 

I myself looked at the CH-701 for some time as a good aircraft to build. You will recall that I actually established this thread because I was interested enough in Zeniths.

 

I also like the fact that CH-701s have the folding wing option that, say, a Savannah doesn't have. I thought they were great planes UNTIL the moment I sat in one. The practical problem for me is that I am too tall and that my hair touches the top of the cockpit which is most annoying. For this reason, I have had to rule out the CH-701 from my wish list. For anyone even a little bit shorter than me, this is a great plane. I will probably now construct a Savannah when the time (and funds) comes.

 

 

[Geoff13]

Just wait a couple of years until the hair starts falling out. No more problem.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Yes, I did read that. He seems to be the lone voice in that thread. However, I have read quite a few threads which seems to indicate the benefits of VGs the other way, i.e., that the stall characteristics for the CH-701 are better, that is, more benign. I also take on board your comment that you want to stick with the designer's design principles.I myself looked at the CH-701 for some time as a good aircraft to build. You will recall that I actually established this thread because I was interested enough in Zeniths.

 

I also like the fact that CH-701s have the folding wing option that, say, a Savannah doesn't have. I thought they were great planes UNTIL the moment I sat in one. The practical problem for me is that I am too tall and that my hair touches the top of the cockpit which is most annoying. For this reason, I have had to rule out the CH-701 from my wish list. For anyone even a little bit shorter than me, this is a great plane. I will probably now construct a Savannah when the time (and funds) comes.

I bought my plans before they brought out the 750, otherwise I would have gone for that. Knowing what I know now though, I'd definitely have gone for a Sav kit rather than scratch building.

 

I'm not sure what the headroom difference is between the 701 and 750, but I've been up with Allan in Bendigo and fitted in his ok. I'm 6' (3mm more with hair).

 

 

[Traveldoc]

Hello chaps,

 

Newby chiming in here. Currently doing my RAAus pilots certificate specifically so I can fly around the farm in my own STOL aircraft! Up to hour 23 of training.

 

I am 186cm (~6'2") 105Kg and had a short test flight in Foxbat. Good shoulder and head room but knees a little close to the instrument panel.

 

Sat in Savannah XL at Narromine Air Show seemed snug but tolerable.

 

Looks like used Zenith 701 are the most economically viable option for me but are they big enough?

 

Now, the reason for this post: If I bought a registered 701 can I do the "beanie" modification (where cabin roof is raised and formed into aerofoil profile) legally and still be allowed to fly it?

 

Apologies if this topic has been covered already. I have only seen it on US websites.

 

Regards, Steve

 

 

[Geoff13]

Hello chaps,Newby chiming in here. Currently doing my RAAus pilots certificate specifically so I can fly around the farm in my own STOL aircraft! Up to hour 23 of training.

I am 186cm (~6'2") 105Kg and had a short test flight in Foxbat. Good shoulder and head room but knees a little close to the instrument panel.

 

Sat in Savannah XL at Narromine Air Show seemed snug but tolerable.

 

Looks like used Zenith 701 are the most economically viable option for me but are they big enough?

 

Now, the reason for this post: If I bought a registered 701 can I do the "beanie" modification (where cabin roof is raised and formed into aerofoil profile) legally and still be allowed to fly it?

 

Apologies if this topic has been covered already. I have only seen it on US websites.

 

Regards, Steve

I can't answer that question but I could suggest that you look at an X-Air Hanuman. I have one and they have a bucket load of room. More than any of the ones you have mentioned. And in the right hands they will land and take of a short as you could want. Certainly as good as if not better than the Foxbat.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Hello chaps,Newby chiming in here. Currently doing my RAAus pilots certificate specifically so I can fly around the farm in my own STOL aircraft! Up to hour 23 of training.

I am 186cm (~6'2") 105Kg and had a short test flight in Foxbat. Good shoulder and head room but knees a little close to the instrument panel.

 

Sat in Savannah XL at Narromine Air Show seemed snug but tolerable.

 

Looks like used Zenith 701 are the most economically viable option for me but are they big enough?

 

Now, the reason for this post: If I bought a registered 701 can I do the "beanie" modification (where cabin roof is raised and formed into aerofoil profile) legally and still be allowed to fly it?

 

Apologies if this topic has been covered already. I have only seen it on US websites.

 

Regards, Steve

Hi Steve,

 

Not sure about the beanie mod, but if you were going to buy a registered aircraft, why wouldn't you just get the Sav? As far as I know the cabin of the original Sav would be exactly the same as the 701. That negates the need for modification.