CH-701 or 750

[Gibbo]

My Brother and I are starting down the path of a building a STOL aircraft (kit). Has anybody had a look at the CH-750 and the legalise of getting one registered with RaAus.

 

760kg rule and home built? 1320 pds or 1230pds as a 600kg. We are both fairly large blokes - < 110kg and need something that will perform fairly well in hot weather. The six cly jab option looks interesting.

 

Gibbo

 

 

[facthunter]

Engine(s)

 

For a Draggy areoplane you need a big prop, Consider a Continental O-200D or a Lycoming 0-233. High overhaul times and proven reliability. Just a thought. Nev..

 

 

[vk3auu]

A couple of points. If you are larger than average go for the CH750. The 701, even with the bow in the doors would be a bit too squeezy.

 

Don't even attempt to use a Jabiru engine. As previously mentioned, you need a big prop. The Rotax 912S is the ideal engine for the 750. The Subaru is too heavy, and unless you get one that really produces 100 HP, performance will not be very good. Also, don't put the leading edge slats on it. Use John Gilpin's vortex generators on the top of the wings and put a row of them on the underside of the elevator.

 

David

 

 

[eightyknots]

My Brother and I are starting down the path of a building a STOL aircraft (kit). Has anybody had a look at the CH-750 and the legalise of getting one registered with RaAus.760kg rule and home built? 1320 pds or 1230pds as a 600kg. We are both fairly large blokes - < 110kg and need something that will perform fairly well in hot weather. The six cly jab option looks interesting.

 

Gibbo

The problem with the CH-750 is the 544 weight limit. The plane's official weight is 775 pounds but typically a painted 750 is around 805 pounds or 365 kg. This only leaves 179 kg for fuel, lunch and two large blokes. The maths does not work out very well.

Now, if you had fitted long range fuel tanks....

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

The (proposed) 760 rule doesn't apply as the manufacturer has limited it to 600, so that's the best you'll ever get. There are no 750s in Australia yet as far as I can tell and if you are the first one to build a particular LSA in Australia, you could be in for a world of (paper cut) hurt. See Steve Bells article in June magazine.

 

Realistically, with the two of you, 4 hours of fuel and 25KG of stuff, you are looking at a need for 290KG useful load. The 701 nor the 750 is going to give you that.

 

The one I can think of that fits the bill is the Just Aircraft Highlander: Just Aircraft: SPECIFICATIONS

 

But again: you'd probably be the first in Aus to build this LSA...

 

 

[maddogmorgan]

I have the plans for the 750 in my hot little hands, and the tail-kit is on the way!

 

Steve Bell and I had a conversation and the short story is no problems with RAA rego

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Is that registering 544 or LSA 600 that's no problem?

 

 

[ianrat]

The Australian agent Allan Barton has a kit already here in Australia and is well underway.

 

 

We have also got a set of plans and will start as soon as we have finished our 601XL. We will be using the Corvair engine in ours and there are few in the states already flying with them.

 

 

Ian Ratcliffe

 

CH 601 XL

 

Brisbane.

 

 

[eightyknots]

I have the plans for the 750 in my hot little hands, and the tail-kit is on the way!Steve Bell and I had a conversation and the short story is no problems with RAA rego

I wonder if you could give us the "long story", i.e., how the CH-750 properly fits into the 544kg ultralight limit?

For instance, Zenith gives the weight of the plane to be 775 pounds. On different websites I read that 750 with paint and an egine weighs around 805 pounds which is 365 kg. This only leaves 179 kg for fuel, some luggage and two POB.

 

This is where things go wrong for me because I also wanted to add extras such as long range fuel tanks and the folding wing kit. Once that has been done and the tanks are full, there's no room for a PAX whatsoever.

 

Please let me know if I have made incorrect assumptions.

 

(One possible weight saving could be to have no slats (subtract 13 kg) and add some stolspeed VGs (add 100 grams).

 

 

[vk3auu]

I would suggest that you have a good look at the Foxbat.

 

Stol performance, 100 knot cruise.

 

David

 

 

[maddogmorgan]

I wonder if you could give us the "long story", i.e., how the CH-750 properly fits into the 544kg ultralight limit?

 

I will...Im on 2 weeks hols at the moment and just leaving for a mountain retreat...But I can say do you think I would invest a serious amount of money (for me anyway) without crunching the numbers or getting the FACTS from the horses mouth (Steve Bell) who I must say was extremely helpful.

 

But remember in this weight limit you cant have everything...there will always be compromises to be made...We all want full glass panels and all the doo-dads and 200 knots cruise on 4 gallons per hour, Long Range Tanks, Folding Wings ...and STOL blah blah blah. One of the first places I looked for weight saving was my self...Yep can cut 15 kilos there ha ha

 

Back on line next week

 

 

[eightyknots]

I have the plans for the 750 in my hot little hands, and the tail-kit is on the way!Steve Bell and I had a conversation and the short story is no problems with RAA rego

Is there some weight saving trick that AB could share with us so that it can be RAA registerd at 544 kaygees and can still carry two POB with fuel and picnic? I'd love to hear about how that's done.

 

 

[maddogmorgan]

Hi all!

 

sorry for the delay in getting back...first of all with 2 x 110kg blokes you are going to be hard pressed to find any aircraft that is limited to the 544kg that will give a decent payload.

 

Back to the weight of the 750, back to my earlier post re:compromises, there ARE 750's that come in at 300kg in the US flying right now. But they had to make COMPROMISES. no fancy interiors, lose the slats, different engines to the factory, basic paint, no folding wings, or 200 litre tanks etc etc

 

So a 300kg 750: leaves a 244 kg payload.

 

2 x 80kg pax: 160kg

 

90 litres of fuel: 65 kg

 

Baggage: 20 kg

 

I managed to backpack through Asia for 3 months with a pack that weighed 12 kilos so 20 is plenty for me. You also don't always need to fill the tanks to the gunnels either. So a 750 is capable of being a very useful aircraft if registered as a '19'.

 

If you want to take advantage of the 600kg yes you would have to go the LSA route, Steve Bell and I had a good conversation about this and it really revolves around $$$ if you are the first to build as an LSA in Oz expect about a $1500 bill to go through the process. But the good news is that if someone else does it before you, you can then get a weight increase on the back of that. (From Steve Bell) These things are selling like crazy in the US so I wouldn't expect it to be long before someone imports or builds under the LSA here. Me I'm going Experimental anyway under the SAAA.

 

 

[Guest bushpastor]

I am thinking the same and am 130kgs wife is 100kgs we are thinking of CH801 and keen to get your opinions too. BTW my last name is Gibbons...Conicidence running into a "Gibbo" .Email me.

 

 

[Johno rv8]

Just talked to a guy who has flown the CH701 and the CH750 both powered by a 100hp rotax. He said the performance was similar, when asked what he meant by similar, he said the CH701 can cruise at a 105 mph and the CH750 96 mph.

 

 

[Jack Tyler]

If Gibbo is still considering these aircraft, then other things to consider might be:

 

-- owner built a/c usually exceed the empty gross weights advertised by the distributor/designer, so the specs you read are 'best case'

 

-- the more incomplete the plans - the more that's left up to the builder to figure out - the more weight creep will occur

 

-- the Highlander is an instructive example. As Bass points out, excellent payload. It also has bundles of room for gear behind the seats and is a good STOL choice. But the downsides are that its cockpit is small for two big blokes and its plans are very 'general' when it comes to detail. Good friend Wes, who's a NASA engineer BTW, has found his Highlander project a long haul as so little is documented and so much needs to be decided (aka: 'invented') by the builder. He has spent a fair bit of time on the internet and at LSA shows, trying to grasp all the build options for each system before deciding how he'll proceed.

 

-- Step #1 for any kit project probably should be buying a full set of plans (the cost for which should be deducted from the later purchase of a kit); kit manufacturers can make many assumptions about what the builder 'should' know, and manufacturing a good kit doesn't automatically result in one producing a thorough, readable and accurate set of plans. In fact, the time & effort needed to develop a set of plans - and to keep them current, over time - bring no immediate added benefit to the mfgr.

 

-- when talking to others who are building the kit you think you might want to build, be sure to couple their comments about the accuracy and thoroughness of the plans with their previous building experience, vocational background, and familiarity with shop tools. Not all builders are from the same mold...

 

-- it sounds like you (Gibbo) need to revisit your mission & your sums. E.g. how often will the two of you be flying together? Perhaps it isn't likely to be often, and when doing so it will be local flights that don't require full tanks. Just how much STOL capability do you really need, how much density altitude will you be coping with, and what max range is required? The more concrete the mission definition, the more your a/c choice will be the right one.

 

-- from the data I see (bydanjohnson.com offers industry sales data, both quarterly & annually, for S-LSA sales in the USA), no LSA's are selling well in the States, altho' I'm not sure how relevant that is to someone here in Oz buying a Zenith kit. The coordinators of this year's major U.S. LSA show, in Sebring last month, claimed it was another success with increased attendance. I would describe it as sparsely attended with a great many elderly fellows (many in wheelchairs and mobility carts) because Veterans were admitted at half-rice. Some of the a/c for sale there were training a/c being sold by flight schools - IOW they weren't seeing the market grow as they had anticipated.

 

Jack

 

 

[ianrat]

The Australian agent has a 750 well under construction right now.

 

We have a kit leaving the USA in a few days. We have alread gotten the plans and they are very extensive. They are about 12 mm thick bundle of A3 sheets all CAD drawings. You can also purchase a full set of DVD showing the total build from first rivet to the last one.

 

The 750 kit is pre drilled on both matting parts so most of the time you are just getting part A and cleocoing it to part B.

 

I have seen the plane while at Oshkosh and it is a great deal better than the 701. Better visibility and room.

 

We have already completed a 701 and nearly completed a 601 he in OZ and have no trouble getting any help from Zenith. Just make a phone call or Email and they will fall over backwards to help you.

 

Ianrat

 

CH 601 XLB

 

Brisbane

 

Australia.

 

 

[will kirkbride]

Hi all,

 

 

[will kirkbride]

750 Zenith

 

Sorry, pressed the wrong key. I am builing a 750 kit at the moment and find it very comprehensive including all the hardware bits and pieces needed to complete the aircraft. I am hoping the 600kg mtow comes in before the first flight, but will probably go through SAAA for a Cof A in case it doesnt happen in time. I visited the factory in Mexico last year and was impressed. Have had no problems with factory back up and information available from existing builders and owners through their Zenith newsletter. Just my 2 cents worth. Hope it flys as good as they say.

 

 

[mAgNeToDrOp]

Excuse my ignorance. So currently the CH 750 can't be registered with a MTOW of 600kg in Australia? Why is that? Doesn't leave much useable weight if it's 540kg

 

 

[winsor68]

I believe that in order for 600kgs the aircraft must be E-Lsa... in order for an aircraft to be E-Lsa it must be a kit version of the factory built Lsa... and Zenith I presume doesn't make an Lsa Ch750?

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Because it is not an E-LSA, unlike, say, the Vans RV-12.

 

That means that you can only register it is a normal 19 category aircraft at 544 KG MTOW.

 

An E-LSA can be 600 KG, but only if no modifications have been made to the original kit.

 

 

[will kirkbride]

Because it is not an E-LSA, unlike, say, the Vans RV-12.That means that you can only register it is a normal 19 category aircraft at 544 KG MTOW.

 

An E-LSA can be 600 KG, but only if no modifications have been made to the original kit.

Alan from Zenair Australia has just flown the factory CH750. It weighs 354kg according to his information,so it would be able to be registered at 544kg I would assume. It has a Rotax 912 and wooden prop.

 

 

[eightyknots]

Alan from Zenair Australia has just flown the factory CH750. It weighs 354kg according to his information,so it would be able to be registered at 544kg I would assume. It has a Rotax 912 and wooden prop.

354 kaygees for a CH-750 is impressively light, lighter than anyone else I have come across on the 'net. Is Alan's plane painted or unpainted? Perhaps it's flying with a Jab 2200 to make it lighter??

 

 

[will kirkbride]

354 kaygees for a CH-750 is impressively light, lighter than anyone else I have come across on the 'net. Is Alan's plane painted or unpainted? Perhaps it's flying with a Jab 2200 to make it lighter??

i will try to post the video of the flight as well as the info from Alans site.