Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Sensitive Elevator
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

steve.freeman(at)syntaxds
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:59 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

This whole thread has been confusing to me.  Why would you want to change the characteristics of the controls before flying the controls?  This is purely a subjective issue and you won’t know if you have improved the performance as you will have no original point of reference.  I haven’t flown left seat in a 601 for many years but I have flown right seat for many hours and I can tell you the controls are responsive without being “twitchy.”  Even though it takes minor stick movement to make big changes there is no difficulty establishing fine control.  I think having to “throw” the controls for longer distances would make an already tight cockpit even tighter.   I think you could be hunting unicorns here but even with that said therein lies the beauty of experimental aircraft.  Go forth and BUILD!

 

Steve

 

From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy

Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 8:40 AM

To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Re: Sensitive Elevator

 

 



 



 



 



"making the stick less sensitive which is a good thing"



 



Not for me!  I love the way the stick feels.  Wouldn't change it for the world.



 



Randy

[quote]

---

aprazer

Joined: 24 Nov 2006
Posts: 93
Location: Boise, Idaho

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:24 am Post subject: Re: Sensitive Elevator

Greetings Andrew,

Keep us informed as to what the factory has to say about your suggestion. It is an interesting concept!

Mack

_________________
The poh-oh-unemployed farm boy from Idaho

pmaxpmax(at)HOTMAIL.COM
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:00 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

I agree with Dr. Gary Ray.  When flying, the "unbalanced" controls are not a problem for me.  I frequently hold the control stick below the handle grips because the force required is so low.  A new pilot flying an XL will frequently over control it.  It happens almost every time a person grabs the stick for the first time in my plane.  I say, "You just have to think about it, and it will turn."



This falls into the category of "stuff that seems important when building, but is not important when flying."  I wrote about this in a chapter in William Wynne's, Corvair Flight Operations Manual.  Many things fall into this category for me: single stick/Dual stick, single throttle/dual throttle, standard engine rotation/left turning.  I worried about these, but they just don't matter to me when flying.



My advice: build and fly.  Staying with the plans makes for the simplest (quickest) build.



Phil Maxson

 601XL-B/Corvair

Center Stick, Hingeless Ailerons 

 Northwest New Jersey



 	  Quote: 	
		   From: davgray(at)sbcglobal.net

 To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Re: Sensitive Elevator

 Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 06:41:45 -0500

 

 --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gary Ray" <davgray(at)sbcglobal.net>

 

 Andrew

 

 The controls on my 601XLB  require only small inputs during flight.  Even in 

 a 60 degree bank it only requires two fingers for pressure and no trim 

 adjustments.

 Compare that to C & P models where the nose drops fast.  The relative 

 displacement of the controls is pretty close.  The pressure for full aileron 

 deflection at slow speed

 is higher than the elevator with my hinge-less ailerons but not irritating. 

 The overall impression is good.

<<SNIP>>
	




 		 	   		  

  [quote][b]

andrewtub

Joined: 01 Nov 2011
Posts: 18

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:10 am Post subject: Re: Sensitive Elevator

The gods have spoken.  From my understanding, It looks as if Zenith has addressed the issue and will soon release a "part" on the 650 that will better balance the controls.  I hope this will be applicable to the 601 series.  



Here is the response I received from Zenith:



Hi Andrew,

There are a couple things at play here that most people lump into "sensitivity" and they are actually two distinctly different things and you have to be very careful trying to change it as one affects the other. There is "balance" and there is "sensitivity" and the two are very different but one changes the other. You might know this but I will explain the difference and I think you will see the problems with your plans.

 

When I say balance, I mean comparing the stick loads for the ailerons versus the elevator. Sensitivity is the amount of stick movement to get a certain roll rate. You are correct in what you are thinking about changing the sensitivity but as you said, the stick loads will be lowered. The XL/650 controls are not balanced to begin with. The elevator is lighter than the ailerons and what you are talking about doing will further unbalance the stick loads. You don't want to do remove sensitivity at the expense of making the stick loads too unbalanced.

 

We have been looking at this very issue with the controls. Part of this has been done and are included in the next revision of the 650 drawings, they should be released next week. The part that is in the new drawings will balance the stick loads but doesn't address the elevator sensitivity.

 

I really like how the 650 flys with just the balanced stick loads. I think it will surprise you how much differently the controls feel when the loads are balanced. Even though the elevator sensitivity isn't changed, having the stick loads about the same you will tend to have less issues with the sensitivity.

 

One thing that you will need to really watch out for in moving the holes for the elevator cables on the stick is the cable routing. There isn't a lot of room and you might have conflicts with the other controls and the structure that may require new fairleads or pulleys. You can make this change if you want but realize the other effects that the changes will make, not all of them will be what you want and may well make your controls "feel" worse.

 

Caleb Gebhardt

craig(at)craigandjean.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:17 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

 	  Quote: 	
		   The gods have spoken.


	


In other words "when all else fails ask the factory" 



-- Craig

steve.freeman(at)syntaxds
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:27 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

Hi Phil…

 

Can you elaborate on “single throttle – Dual throttle”  Issue.  What about Single Brakes dual brakes.  I am spending a great deal of time and effort installing dual brakes and I am beginning to think it not worth it. 

 

Steve

 

From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Phil Maxson

Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 10:00 AM

To: Zenith List

Subject: RE: Re: Sensitive Elevator

 

I agree with Dr. Gary Ray.  When flying, the "unbalanced" controls are not a problem for me.  I frequently hold the control stick below the handle grips because the force required is so low.  A new pilot flying an XL will frequently over control it.  It happens almost every time a person grabs the stick for the first time in my plane.  I say, "You just have to think about it, and it will turn."



This falls into the category of "stuff that seems important when building, but is not important when flying."  I wrote about this in a chapter in William Wynne's, Corvair Flight Operations Manual.  Many things fall into this category for me: single stick/Dual stick, single throttle/dual throttle, standard engine rotation/left turning.  I worried about these, but they just don't matter to me when flying.



My advice: build and fly.  Staying with the plans makes for the simplest (quickest) build.



Phil Maxson

601XL-B/Corvair

Center Stick, Hingeless Ailerons 

Northwest New Jersey

 	  Quote: 	
		   From: davgray(at)sbcglobal.net (davgray(at)sbcglobal.net)

 To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com (zenith-list(at)matronics.com)

 Subject: Re: Re: Sensitive Elevator

 Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 06:41:45 -0500

 

 --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gary Ray" <davgray(at)sbcglobal.net (davgray(at)sbcglobal.net)>

 

 Andrew

 

 The controls on my 601XLB require only small inputs during flight. Even in 

 a 60 degree bank it only requires two fingers for pressure and no trim 

 adjustments.

 Compare that to C & P models where the nose drops fast. The relative 

 displacement of the controls is pretty close. The pressure for full aileron 

 deflection at slow speed

 is higher than the elevator with my hinge-less ailerons but not irritating. 

 The overall impression is good.

<<SNIP>>
	




 	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7

  [quote][b]

andrewtub

Joined: 01 Nov 2011
Posts: 18

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:34 am Post subject: Re: Sensitive Elevator

LOL, yep!



 	  craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote: 	
		   	  Quote: 	
		   The gods have spoken.



	


In other words "when all else fails ask the factory" 



-- Craig

goodings(at)yorku.ca
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:43 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

Andrew:



Good work.  The overly sensitive elevator is an undesirable trait if the 

aircraft is aimed at the "low-time pilot and first-time builder" - that is 

a quote from Chris Heintz.  It might not be a bad idea to run your mod 

past Chris/Zenith people, just in case there is some other consideration 

not appreciated.  And, as a long-time Cessna driver, I can sympathize with 

the undesirably insensitive controls of the C-150/152/172.  Sports cars 

and Mack trucks come to mind.  Perhaps my problem in the early days of our 

CH601HD stemmed from relatively sensitive pitch combined with rather 

insensitive roll.  Cessnas are insensitive in both.



John Goodings, C-FGPJ, CH601HD with R912S, Carp/Ottawa/Orillia.

BARRY CHECK 6

Joined: 15 Mar 2011
Posts: 738

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 11:31 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

In other words. When stupid ideas run through your head Call The Factory...  Better yet the designer.  



On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:34 PM, andrewtub <andrewtub(at)yahoo.com (andrewtub(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:

 [quote]--> Zenith-List message posted by: "andrewtub" <andrewtub(at)yahoo.com (andrewtub(at)yahoo.com)>

  

 LOL, yep!

 

 

 craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:

 >

 > >  The gods have spoken.

 > >

 > >

 >

 > In other words "when all else fails ask the factory" 

 >

 > -- Craig

 

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=367141#367141

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 ===========

  target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List

 ===========

 http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 le, List Admin.

 ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

 

 

 

 [b]

BARRY CHECK 6

Joined: 15 Mar 2011
Posts: 738

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 11:35 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

If one thinks a 601 is 'sensitive'  they better not fly an RV or a Grumman or a Pits or a Night Twister or an Extra or any plane that is RESPONSIVE.  Responsive not sensitive.



On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:10 PM, andrewtub <andrewtub(at)yahoo.com (andrewtub(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:

 [quote]--> Zenith-List message posted by: "andrewtub" <andrewtub(at)yahoo.com (andrewtub(at)yahoo.com)>

  

 The gods have spoken.  From my understanding, It looks as if Zenith has addressed the issue and will soon release a "part" on the 650 that will better balance the controls.  I hope this will be applicable to the 601 series.

  

 Here is the response I received from Zenith:

 

 Hi Andrew,

 There are a couple things at play here that most people lump into "sensitivity" and they are actually two distinctly different things and you have to be very careful trying to change it as one affects the other. There is "balance" and there is "sensitivity" and the two are very different but one changes the other. You might know this but I will explain the difference and I think you will see the problems with your plans.

  

 When I say balance, I mean comparing the stick loads for the ailerons versus the elevator. Sensitivity is the amount of stick movement to get a certain roll rate. You are correct in what you are thinking about changing the sensitivity but as you said, the stick loads will be lowered. The XL/650 controls are not balanced to begin with. The elevator is lighter than the ailerons and what you are talking about doing will further unbalance the stick loads. You don't want to do remove sensitivity at the expense of making the stick loads too unbalanced.

  

 We have been looking at this very issue with the controls. Part of this has been done and are included in the next revision of the 650 drawings, they should be released next week. The part that is in the new drawings will balance the stick loads but doesn't address the elevator sensitivity.

  

 I really like how the 650 flys with just the balanced stick loads. I think it will surprise you how much differently the controls feel when the loads are balanced. Even though the elevator sensitivity isn't changed, having the stick loads about the same you will tend to have less issues with the sensitivity.

  

 One thing that you will need to really watch out for in moving the holes for the elevator cables on the stick is the cable routing. There isn't a lot of room and you might have conflicts with the other controls and the structure that may require new fairleads or pulleys. You can make this change if you want but realize the other effects that the changes will make, not all of them will be what you want and may well make your controls "feel" worse.

  

 Caleb Gebhardt

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=367137#367137

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 ===========

  target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List

 ===========

 http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 le, List Admin.

 ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

 

 

 

 [b]

entecrj(at)sbcglobal.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 11:57 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com>

To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com

Sent: Fri, February 24, 2012 1:35:25 PM

Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Sensitive Elevator

If one thinks a 601 is 'sensitive'  they better not fly an RV or a Grumman or a Pits or a Night Twister or an Extra or any plane that is RESPONSIVE.  Responsive not sensitive.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  Responsive not sensitive

Reminds me of years ago when I was one of the instructors for our remote control club. 

I had a pattern plane setup on a transmitter with dual rates, flip the switch on and the airplane was quite docile, flip it off and it became very responsive. 

  After one of the students would become confident that they could fly anything once the trainer plane was mastered, I would let them fly the pattern ship with the dual rates on. They would usually get the hang of it rather quickly. Then I would flip the switch off, and watch out!!!

 The last thing I would show them was to move the balance weights back to about 38 percent of MAC, now you were talking about something that was sensitive to fly.

 R. Johnson

 [quote][b]

BARRY CHECK 6

Joined: 15 Mar 2011
Posts: 738

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 12:29 pm Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

You are correct RusselOne does have to learn to fly the BASICS - TRAINERS before they advance.  That is what the C152 was all about.  

I have been flying R/C for over 40 years, trained 100's and the EASIEST planes to fly are PATTERN SHIPS.  They go where YOU put them, you don't have to over correct for dihedral or try to guess where the plane is going to be when you do a roll.

 



NOW... Who in their right mind goes out and buys a kit without first getting a ride in the plane they intend to build.  And who in their right mind doesn't become VERY proficient in that type of plane before they become a TEST PILOT in the plane they just built. OR do they intend to strap that plane on some other dumb-ass with all those HOMEMADE modifications.  After all, the OTHER Test Pilot has 100 Hrs in Type but NOT in Homemade Modification MAKE.

 



 



On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Russell Johnson <entecrj(at)sbcglobal.net (entecrj(at)sbcglobal.net)> wrote:

 [quote]From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com (flyadive(at)gmail.com)>

 To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com (zenith-list(at)matronics.com)

Sent: Fri, February 24, 2012 1:35:25 PM

 Subject: Re: Re: Sensitive Elevator



If one thinks a 601 is 'sensitive'  they better not fly an RV or a Grumman or a Pits or a Night Twister or an Extra or any plane that is RESPONSIVE.  Responsive not sensitive.

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  

  

  Responsive not sensitive

 

  

Reminds me of years ago when I was one of the instructors for our remote control club. 

I had a pattern plane setup on a transmitter with dual rates, flip the switch on and the airplane was quite docile, flip it off and it became very responsive.  

  After one of the students would become confident that they could fly anything once the trainer plane was mastered, I would let them fly the pattern ship with the dual rates on. They would usually get the hang of it rather quickly. Then I would flip the switch off, and watch out!!!

   

 The last thing I would show them was to move the balance weights back to about 38 percent of MAC, now you were talking about something that was sensitive to fly.

  

 R. Johnson



  	  Quote: 	
		  



arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List

tp://forums.matronics.com

_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	


[b]

andrewtub

Joined: 01 Nov 2011
Posts: 18

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:05 pm Post subject: Re: Sensitive Elevator

Delete...

Last edited by andrewtub on Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:36 pm; edited 1 time in total

steve.freeman(at)syntaxds
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:51 pm Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

What kind of dumbass post such nonsense to a public forum?



Steve



--

andrewtub

Joined: 01 Nov 2011
Posts: 18

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:54 pm Post subject: Re: Sensitive Elevator

 	  steve.freeman(at)syntaxds wrote: 	
		  What kind of dumbass post such nonsense to a public forum?



Steve



-- 	




 My point exactly

Afterfxllc(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 6:51 pm Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

Steve it would simply be a matter of preference it wouldn't effect the  amount of travel the elevator has just would take more input from the pilot to  achieve the full deflection. One could make the argument that less travel on the  stick could cause an inadvertent over control and thus stress the airframe.  After the upgrade the stick travel is much less thus making the stick travel a  lot less. You could do the same thing to the ailerons to allow more stick travel  left to right also if you wanted to.

  

  In a message dated 2/24/2012 11:01:48 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  steve.freeman(at)syntaxds.com writes:

 [quote]      

This    whole thread has been confusing to me.  Why would you want to change the    characteristics of the controls before flying the controls?  This is    purely a subjective issue and you wonâ€™t know if you have improved the    performance as you will have no original point of reference.  I havenâ€™t    flown left seat in a 601 for many years but I have flown right seat for many    hours and I can tell you the controls are responsive without being â€œtwitchy.â€     Even though it takes minor stick movement to make big changes there is    no difficulty establishing fine control.  I think having to â€œthrowâ€ the    controls for longer distances would make an already tight cockpit even    tighter.   I think you could be hunting unicorns here but even with    that said therein lies the beauty of experimental aircraft.  Go forth and    BUILD!   

    

Steve   

          

From:    owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com    [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of    Randy

Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 8:40 AM

To:    zenith-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Re: Sensitive    Elevator



   

       

 

      

 

      

 

      

 

      

"making    the stick less sensitive which is a good thing"

      

 

      

Not for me!  I    love the way the stick feels.  Wouldn't change it for the    world.

      

 

      

Randy

   [quote]          

-----      Original Message ----- 

          

From: Afterfxllc(at)aol.com (Afterfxllc(at)aol.com)      

          

To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com (zenith-list(at)matronics.com)      

          

Sent:      Friday, February 24, 2012 9:19 AM

          

Subject:      Re: Re: Sensitive Elevator

          

 

          

If      I read your email correct.....

          

 

          

I      have thought about doing the exact same thing for my next 2 planes I      build.... What you are suggesting makes sense because it would allow      more stick movement for the same elevator movement thus making the stick      less sensitive which is a good thing.

          

 

          

Jeff

          

 

               

In      a message dated 2/24/2012 6:43:25 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, davgray(at)sbcglobal.net (davgray(at)sbcglobal.net)      writes:

     [quote]       

-->        Zenith-List message posted by: "Gary Ray" <davgray(at)sbcglobal.net (davgray(at)sbcglobal.net)>



Andrew



The        controls on my 601XLB  require only small inputs during flight.         Even in 

a 60 degree bank it only requires two fingers for pressure and        no trim 

adjustments.

Compare that to C & P models where the        nose drops fast.  The relative 

displacement of the controls is        pretty close.  The pressure for full aileron 

deflection at slow        speed

is higher than the elevator with my hinge-less ailerons but not        irritating. 

The overall impression is good.



Mine displays        completely neutral stability which makes it feel nimble but 

does not        self correct and return to level flight by itself when disturbed.

For        that reason I did put Dynon's autopilot in.  It is easier to check a        map 

or look up a frequency  without deviating from course and        flight level.



Gary Ray  davgray(at)sbcglobal.net (davgray(at)sbcglobal.net)

Zenith        601XL-B, William Wynne Corvair 0.060 over, Roy's 5th bearing,

Mark's        Falcon Heads, Marvel Schebler MA3-SPA Carburetor, 175 Hrs        TT



--

Afterfxllc(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 6:57 pm Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

Now there is the list we all know and love........

  In a message dated 2/24/2012 4:09:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  andrewtub(at)yahoo.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Zenith-List message posted by: "andrewtub"    <andrewtub(at)yahoo.com>

Yea, what kind of "DUMBASS" would make    HOMEMADE modifications to a plane in the first place with out consulting the    manufacture.  Kinda like some of these "stupid" "DUMBASS"'s that would    but in the middle of a conversation with out knowing all of the facts of the    matter.

[quote="BARRY CHECK 6"]You are correct RusselOne does have to    learn to fly the BASICS -ï¿½TRAINERSï¿½before they advance. ï¿½That is what    the C152 was all about. ï¿½

I have been flying R/C for over 40 years,    trained 100's and the EASIEST planes to fly are PATTERN SHIPS. ï¿½They go    where YOU put them, you don't have to over correct for dihedral or try to    guess where the plane is going to be when you do a roll.

NOW... Who    in their right mind goes out and buys a kit without first getting a ride in    the plane they intend to build. ï¿½And who in their right mind doesn't become    VERYï¿½proficient in that type of plane before they become a TEST PILOT in the    plane they just built. OR do they intend to strap that plane on some other    dumb-ass with all those HOMEMADE modifications. ï¿½After all, the OTHER Test    Pilot has 100 Hrs in Type but NOT in Homemade Modification    MAKE.

ï¿½

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Russell    Johnson  wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   From: FLYaDIVE 

  To:    zenith-list(at)matronics.com (zenith-list(at)matronics.com)

 Sent: Fri,    February 24, 2012 1:35:25 PM

  Subject: Re: Re: Sensitive    Elevator

 If one thinks a 601 is 'sensitive' ï¿½they better    not fly an RV or a Grumman or a Pits or a Night Twister or an Extra or any    plane that isï¿½RESPONSIVE. ï¿½Responsiveï¿½notï¿½sensitive.

 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  ï¿½

     ï¿½

  ï¿½Responsive not sensitive

 ï¿½    

 Reminds me of years ago when I was one of the instructors for our    remote control club. 

 I had a pattern plane setup on a transmitter    withï¿½dual rates, flip the switch on andï¿½the airplane was quite docile,    flip it off and it became very responsive.  

 ï¿½ After one of the    students would become confident that they could fly anything once the trainer    plane was mastered, I would let them fly the pattern ship with the dual rates    on. They would usually get the hang of it rather quickly. Then I would flip    the switch off, and watch out!!!

   ï¿½

  The    last thing I would show them was to move the balance weights back to about 38    percent of MAC, now you were talking about something that was sensitive to    fly.

  ï¿½

  R. Johnson

 > 

 > 

 >    arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List

 >    tp://forums.matronics.com

 >    _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 > 

 >    

 [b]

Read this topic online    here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=367165#367165

 [quote][b]

bryanmmartin

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1018

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:24 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

As far as "single throttle - dual throttle" is concerned: The original plans call for a throttle on each side so a pilot flying from either seat can work the throttle with his non off stick hand. I did not particularly like the complexity of the dual throttle setup and I wanted to install a vernier throttle. 



The thing I like about a vernier throttle is the fact that you don't have to adjust a friction control to keep the throttle from drifting from its setting, the throttle will stay where you put it without any further consideration. You can also fine tune the throttle setting by turning the knob. A vernier throttle installed on one side would render the second throttle control inoperative unless you rigged up something to release the lock on the vernier throttle. I found that a while sitting in the right seat I could reach the throttle on the left side of the panel if I changed hands on the Y-stick and reached across with my left hand. It wasn't ideal but it wasn't difficult and I didn't plan on flying the plane solo from the right seat anyway. So I eliminated all the mechanism associated with the dual throttle and just ran a single control cable through the firewall to connect to the carburetors. 



As far as the dual brakes are concerned, unless you are planning on flying solo from the right seat, they would be of limited usefulness. They might be useful if a passenger had to land the plane in the event of pilot incapacitation, but that's a pretty rare event. A long grass runway would probably solve that issue.

On Feb 24, 2012, at 12:26 PM, Steve Freeman wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Hi Phil…

  

 Can you elaborate on “single throttle – Dual throttle”  Issue.  What about Single Brakes dual brakes.  I am spending a great deal of time and effort installing dual brakes and I am beginning to think it not worth it.

  


	


-- 

Bryan Martin

N61BM, CH 601 XL,

RAM Subaru, Stratus re-drive.

do not archive.

_________________
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.

jeffrey_davidson(at)earth
Guest

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:21 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

My take on the throttle question was the consideration of two pilots flying together.  A throttle on each side made it easy.  You could put one throttle in the middle, but then you need two sticks rather than the center stick with the Y.  I addessed the friction lock concern by removing the fiction bushing from the right seat throttle.  Only the left friction lock is operative.  That was a five minute job prior to installation.  The only concern with the dual throttle setup was needing slots in the firewall for the cables going to the throttle rod.  The plans showed a hole thru the firewall but the cable rises and falls flexing the firewall.  I used a small bellows to seal the slot and n66 to line it for a very nice feel.  The throttle rod was from USJabiru but I made attachments per the Zenith plans to capture the rod ends mechanically.

Jeff Davidson

CH601-HD/Jab 3300A 



do not archive

psm(at)att.net
Guest

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:58 am Post subject: Sensitive Elevator

Hi Jeff,



I agree with you about having two throttles when the plane has a center 

Y stick.  I tried the UsJabiru approach and didn't like it.   I copied 

their basic idea but moved the torque tube inside the cabin with the 

control arms facing down rather than up.   I also mounted the throttle 

controls on the side of the cabin instead of on the instrument panel.   

That way guys with short arms like mine could still rest their hand on 

the throttle control in normal flight.  The finished layout has both 

throttle knobs, the torque tube arm ends, and the carburetor all at 

about the same height.  This allows for very smooth throttle control 

movement.



I left the friction locks on both throttle knobs.  So far I have only 

flown my plane solo, so I don't know if this will be a problem or not.  

I will keep your idea in mind of removing the friction lock from the 

copilot side if this becomes a problem.



Paul

Camas, WA

XL in phase I flight test



On 2/25/2012 10:18 AM, Jeff Davidson wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 My take on the throttle question was the consideration of two pilots flying together.  A throttle on each side made it easy.  You could put one throttle in the middle, but then you need two sticks rather than the center stick with the Y.  I addessed the friction lock concern by removing the fiction bushing from the right seat throttle.  Only the left friction lock is operative.  That was a five minute job prior to installation.  The only concern with the dual throttle setup was needing slots in the firewall for the cables going to the throttle rod.  The plans showed a hole thru the firewall but the cable rises and falls flexing the firewall.  I used a small bellows to seal the slot and n66 to line it for a very nice feel.  The throttle rod was from USJabiru but I made attachments per the Zenith plans to capture the rod ends mechanically.

 Jeff Davidson

 CH601-HD/Jab 3300A



 do not archive

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3

Jump to:

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