 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dougsnash(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 6:11 am Post subject: 701 Sturdiness (was:601 crashes) |
 |
|
Jerry, I think you would be surprised how tough the
701 is. Check out the carrier style landing Gus
(flywithgus.com) did with the Corvair powered 701.
Any plane that can take that handle a landing like
that and shrug it off like that one did has got to
have something going for it.
I will agree that the 016 skins are pretty thin. Some
care will have to be taken to prevent hanger rash.
Doug MacDonald
CH-701 Scratch Builder
NW Ontario, Canada
Working on Electrical system
Do not archive
--- Jerry Hey <jerry(at)jerryhey.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
<jerry(at)jerryhey.com>
I am not a 601 builder or pilot. My heart goes out
to all the 601
guys. I would not take a demo ride in one until
what is going on is
understood and remedied.
I am about to start scratch building a 701. I have
built tube and rag
in the past.
The 601 crashes have caused me to take another look
at the 701. Quite
honestly, I love this airplane and it is probably
strong enough to
never have a structural failure BUT nobody could
call it rugged. The
thin skins, widely separated ribs, continual talk
about oil canning.
I can imagine ia 701 is not difficult to dent.
Perhaps the trade off
of structure vs weight has tilted too far toward
light weight. Maybe
that is true but just for me. Others would quite
rightly feel different.
I would not mind adding a few pounds of toughness to
my airplane.
Jerry
|
__________________________________________________
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jerry(at)jerryhey.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:20 pm Post subject: 701 Sturdiness (was:601 crashes) |
|
|
Doug, just got back from SnF to find 495 messages. I want to respond
to your's because others will read it and I hope it clarifies my
opinion. I do not believe for a minute that the 701 has structural
problems. Many copies of this plane have been heavily used and abused
and it has remained in one piece. But being strong and being tough
are two different things. The 701 is strong. However, I wonder,
with the thin skins and the rib spacing. if she is very tough. At
Sun n Fun I ran my hands over the wings and the skins deflected at the
slightest touch. That is something I just don't like. I don't know
what my next step will be, . Jerry
On Apr 10, 2008, at 10:07 AM, MacDonald Doug wrote:
| Quote: |
<dougsnash(at)yahoo.com>
Jerry, I think you would be surprised how tough the
701 is. Check out the carrier style landing Gus
(flywithgus.com) did with the Corvair powered 701.
Any plane that can take that handle a landing like
that and shrug it off like that one did has got to
have something going for it.
I will agree that the 016 skins are pretty thin. Some
care will have to be taken to prevent hanger rash.
Doug MacDonald
CH-701 Scratch Builder
NW Ontario, Canada
Working on Electrical system
Do not archive
--- Jerry Hey <jerry(at)jerryhey.com> wrote:
>
> <jerry(at)jerryhey.com>
>
> I am not a 601 builder or pilot. My heart goes out
> to all the 601
> guys. I would not take a demo ride in one until
> what is going on is
> understood and remedied.
>
> I am about to start scratch building a 701. I have
> built tube and rag
> in the past.
>
> The 601 crashes have caused me to take another look
> at the 701. Quite
> honestly, I love this airplane and it is probably
> strong enough to
> never have a structural failure BUT nobody could
> call it rugged. The
> thin skins, widely separated ribs, continual talk
> about oil canning.
> I can imagine ia 701 is not difficult to dent.
> Perhaps the trade off
> of structure vs weight has tilted too far toward
> light weight. Maybe
> that is true but just for me. Others would quite
> rightly feel different.
>
> I would not mind adding a few pounds of toughness to
> my airplane.
>
> Jerry
__________________________________________________
|
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ihab.awad(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:36 pm Post subject: 701 Sturdiness (was:601 crashes) |
|
|
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Jerry Hey <jerry(at)jerryhey.com> wrote:
| Quote: | But being strong and being tough are two different things. ... the
skins deflected at the slightest touch.
|
How are you defining these terms, "strong" and "tough"? By the latter,
do you mean resistant to accidental impact with bushes, rocks, hail,
etc?
Ihab
--
Ihab A.B. Awad, Palo Alto, CA
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
