Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 68 of 68

Thread: Zlin Savage Norden

  1. #41

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 1934A View Post
    What did it weigh before the rework?
    I don’t know the exact number but it was around 930 pounds as it had a parachute, ACME’s, ACME stinger with the baby bushwheel, etc. I think a well optioned LSA Norden with 26” Airstreaks could come in around 850 pounds with ACME’s and a T3 tailwheel.
    Likes Utah-Jay, 1934A liked this post

  2. #42

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    SE Montana
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by jetcat11 View Post
    I don’t know the exact number but it was around 930 pounds as it had a parachute, ACME’s, ACME stinger with the baby bushwheel, etc. I think a well optioned LSA Norden with 26” Airstreaks could come in around 850 pounds with ACME’s and a T3 tailwheel.
    Set up like that @ 850lbs is a recipe for a great performer! Hope to see it offered in kit form eventually!
    Likes jetcat11 liked this post

  3. #43
    Crash, Jr.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    710
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm really curious to see actual weights. Knowing what an 850lb plane looks like and how few items you can have on such a plane and then seeing the Norden with all the gizmos and slats...something doesn't add up.

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Crash, Jr. View Post
    I'm really curious to see actual weights. Knowing what an 850lb plane looks like and how few items you can have on such a plane and then seeing the Norden with all the gizmos and slats...something doesn't add up.
    Well everything you see in the pictures I just posted minus the 29” tires for 22” tires weighs in at 800 pounds empty. I’m figuring the 915 SLSA models will come in around 850-875 pounds as the US requires more equipment anyways and how most here will have them optioned.

  5. #45
    Crash, Jr.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    710
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well then I'm impressed. It just seems that level of fit and finish and lots of instruments would weigh more but maybe they have it worked out. Is the Rotax that much lighter than a small continental?
    Likes jetcat11 liked this post

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    The 915 iS weighs about as much as an O-200D installed at around 200 pounds and is good for 145HP to 15,000FT. They weighed the engine attached to the firewall with propeller and spinner and it weighed in at 243 pounds.

    It is extremely impressive and there are many carbon fiber parts used throughout such as the cowling, floorboards, drooped tips, and a new 80” 4 blade E-PROPS propeller that only weighs 5.3 pounds! I can’t wait to see what this week brings for new testing and evaluation with this lighter empty weight.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	59C57537-90B7-4037-8F04-1D06A09E55F1.jpeg 
Views:	152 
Size:	153.8 KB 
ID:	55475
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	6EC234AD-D3C4-4FFB-948E-40272AC1E74B.jpeg 
Views:	152 
Size:	122.9 KB 
ID:	55474
    Likes Utah-Jay, soyAnarchisto liked this post

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes gahi, MTBR12, Utah-Jay liked this post

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes Utah-Jay liked this post

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    Dang! I would not have won this bet. https://fb.watch/7v-tA_g7L9/

  10. #50

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Canyon, tx
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    Give me a shaping hammer. I bet I can make it move.

  11. #51
    soyAnarchisto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Posts
    606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Anybody have one of these in the US where we can see and fly it? I didn't see these guys at Oshkosh - but I admit I wasn't looking for them.

  12. #52
    Utah-Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    Heber City, UT
    Posts
    344
    Post Thanks / Like
    One of my neighbors is getting one of the first 5 in the US. Looking forward to seeing it
    Bearhawk Companion QB Builder
    Revo Sunglasses Ambassador
    https://www.instagram.com/jay_townsend_utah/
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ0...tBJLdV8HB_jSIA
    Thanks soyAnarchisto thanked for this post

  13. #53
    soyAnarchisto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Posts
    606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Factory build, or a kit? When do they expect delivery?


    Quote Originally Posted by Utah-Jay View Post
    One of my neighbors is getting one of the first 5 in the US. Looking forward to seeing it

  14. #54

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Canyon, tx
    Posts
    868
    Post Thanks / Like
    I was thinking that there was going to be a Norden at Arkanstol but maybe not. Maybe Jetcat11 will chime in
    Likes soyAnarchisto liked this post

  15. #55
    Utah-Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    Heber City, UT
    Posts
    344
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by soyAnarchisto View Post
    Factory build, or a kit? When do they expect delivery?
    Factory build, I do not believe they are currently selling kits.

    Deliver will be soon I suspect.
    Bearhawk Companion QB Builder
    Revo Sunglasses Ambassador
    https://www.instagram.com/jay_townsend_utah/
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ0...tBJLdV8HB_jSIA
    Likes soyAnarchisto liked this post

  16. #56
    Rob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    AZ06
    Posts
    793
    Post Thanks / Like
    Seems to me with all that ground clearance, A massive 2 blade prop would go much further in increasing the stol aspect of this plane vs trying to lighten up a plane that's already reasonably light. What are they trying to gain by the smaller disc out front? cruise speed?

  17. #57
    Utah-Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    Heber City, UT
    Posts
    344
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have read at times that 3 blade props look cooler… to me a giant 2 blade prop is more pleasing to the eye

  18. #58
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    11,434
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Utah-Jay View Post
    I have read at times that 3 blade props look cooler… to me a giant 2 blade prop is more pleasing to the eye
    An engineer who I respect told me long ago that the most efficient propeller has only one blade. Each additional blade is operating in the wake turbulence of the preceding blade. The main or perhaps only reason for more blades is to harness the horsepower from the larger engines. Of course there are other reasons more technical in nature. Also the larger the diameter, the larger the mass of air is "pushed" back creating more thrust. The diameter is limited due to clearance needs or tip speed limitations. A long slow turning propeller is the most efficient.

    This one Everel, is mounted on a pivot which allows the blade to seek it's own angle depending upon the speed of rotation and load.



    This is a 96" propeller for a 90 horsepower Curtis Jenny which had a slow turning 8 cylinder OX-5 engine.

    N1PA
    Thanks Utah-Jay thanked for this post
    Likes Rob liked this post

  19. #59
    courierguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Inkom, Idaho
    Posts
    1,978
    Post Thanks / Like
    Three blade props.....flew them for 30 years, now with the 2 blade Prince. Aero benefits aside, when working in the hangar, a 2 blade is more user friendly, a 3 blade always has 1 blade in the way. I have a 3 blade hanging on the wall, a spare in case I trash the Prince,
    Likes Utah-Jay, Rob liked this post

  20. #60
    Rob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    AZ06
    Posts
    793
    Post Thanks / Like
    Efficiency aside, it seems to me that when guys are talking stol like Valdez, Texas whatever and yea haw stuff, they are looking at take off distances in the two digit (in feet) category. In that range, I've always been of the opinion that how much lift you can generate still in 'the stall', is more valuable than how much lift you can generate squirting it down the runway on thrust. By 'in the stall' I mean lift generated at a stand still.

    And while I realize moving a segment or air across the wing faster creates more lift, at the lift off speed of most of these light weight buggies, it seems to me getting a wider swath of air across the wing would get you airborne sooner.

    You wouldn't have to spin a 32' prop very fast to get a cub weight aircraft to levitate.

    I think this becomes less important than insta thrust as the weight curve goes up. which is why there are so many Skywagon guys that really enjoy light 3 blade composite props in spite of their other short comings.

    I am not an engineer, and was mostly honestly curious. Perhaps a little top end speed was the goal? Or perhaps a quieter prop? I imagine that engine is louder than that 4 blade.

    Take care, Rob
    Likes KevinJ liked this post

  21. #61
    supercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Smith Pond near Millinocket, Me
    Posts
    533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rob, were you talking about the shortcomings of the 3 blade props or the Skywagon guys. LOL
    Likes Rob liked this post

  22. #62
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    11,434
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob View Post
    And while I realize moving a segment or air across the wing faster creates more lift, at the lift off speed of most of these light weight buggies, it seems to me getting a wider swath of air across the wing would get you airborne sooner.
    Rob, This is an example of what you said. Notice how the engine thrust line of this airplane is set just above the wing. This is ideal for accelerating a wide swath of air over the upper surface of the wing.



    When ready for departure with the brakes on, the flaps down and a brisk wind, applying full power provides enough lift on the wing to extend the shock struts to their full extension. Without rolling a wheel.
    N1PA
    Likes Rob, mam90 liked this post

  23. #63

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    267
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by skywagon8a View Post
    When ready for departure with the brakes on, the flaps down and a brisk wind, applying full power provides enough lift on the wing to extend the shock struts to their full extension. Without rolling a wheel.
    Which surely means that all that thrust that is producing lift is not available for acceleration. If producing static lift was so advantageous why do the hot STOL pilots delay flap extension until rotation? Answer - they minimize drag to get maximum acceleration to rotate speed and then, and only then, do they increase lift.
    Likes soyAnarchisto liked this post

  24. #64
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    11,434
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by frequent_flyer View Post
    Which surely means that all that thrust that is producing lift is not available for acceleration. If producing static lift was so advantageous why do the hot STOL pilots delay flap extension until rotation? Answer - they minimize drag to get maximum acceleration to rotate speed and then, and only then, do they increase lift.
    I try to let other pilots determine what they think is the best procedure for them in any type of event.

    For your information. I have flown the airplane shown in the picture of post #63 and others of the same identical type in numerous takeoff contests and have never been beat by anyone, including a stripped down PA-18 flown by a very capable pilot. There are several other members here who have witnessed those events. Other pilots have gone out of their way to run against me. All of them have failed.

    So to answer your question, you do what works for you and I'll do what works best for me.
    N1PA

  25. #65
    Rob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    AZ06
    Posts
    793
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by frequent_flyer View Post
    Which surely means that all that thrust that is producing lift is not available for acceleration. If producing static lift was so advantageous why do the hot STOL pilots delay flap extension until rotation? Answer - they minimize drag to get maximum acceleration to rotate speed and then, and only then, do they increase lift.
    That is an interesting observation. And here I thought it was a simple case of monkey see - monkey do.
    Have you ever flown in a breeze enough to rotate from a standstill? Would you still leave the flaps stowed and go blistering down the strip?

    Take care, Rob
    Thanks Bowie thanked for this post

  26. #66

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    267
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob View Post
    That is an interesting observation. And here I thought it was a simple case of monkey see - monkey do.
    Have you ever flown in a breeze enough to rotate from a standstill? Would you still leave the flaps stowed and go blistering down the strip?
    If shortest takeoff was achieved by lowering flaps at rotate speed then wouldn't flap go down at zero speed in this case? After all, you are saying rotate speed is zero.

    It could well be monkey see - monkey do. I have no aspiration to be a STOL winner and I set my flaps before setting the power.
    Likes courierguy liked this post

  27. #67

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    6,455
    Post Thanks / Like
    Next time you take off with your usual flap setting get to a speed about 5-10 mph lower than your normal rotation speed and pull full flaps. The plane will leap into the air at a flatter than normal attitude. It’s SOP if you find yourself needing to take off shorter than normal. Or you can set full flaps from the start. That makes lifting the tail easier, too. Expect to apply forward stick to maintain airspeed. Full flap takeoffs are very useful providing you have effective flaps and enough power.

  28. #68
    Rob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    AZ06
    Posts
    793
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by frequent_flyer View Post
    If shortest takeoff was achieved by lowering flaps at rotate speed then wouldn't flap go down at zero speed in this case? After all, you are saying rotate speed is zero.

    It could well be monkey see - monkey do. I have no aspiration to be a STOL winner and I set my flaps before setting the power.
    My apologies, My last post was a poor attempt at poking fun.

    I am probably somewhere between yourself and SB in a typical flap setting for T/O. I mostly always set some flaps in ( cub or Cessna type airplane) because I am not built like an orangoutang, but always drop all it takes to pry loose from mother earth as I rotate. Thumb never leaves the button, because I am milking them back off as soon as it will take it, and because if I left the ground, my intentions are to get somewhere, that happens better with the flaps gone.

    In a work plane I always set 'some' because there is nothing worse than nearing the end of the strip take off only to discover the flap motor quit on the last landing. Having said that, in the type I fly for work, it has been my experience that as soon as the tail flies, you can tab down the rest of the flaps while nudging back on the stick, and it will leave the ground. This will be too slow to try and climb out GA or Airline style, so you will need to roll the nose over and pick up some steam before you get too excited about climbing anywhere. But that is an entirely different ball game than where this thread started.

    Take care,Rob
    Likes JeffP liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Zlin Aviation Outback Shock Cub
    By jetcat11 in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 08-31-2019, 12:41 AM
  2. New Model by Zlin Aviation: SHOCK CUB
    By azdave in forum In The News
    Replies: 157
    Last Post: 09-22-2018, 07:48 PM
  3. zlin aero cub
    By saker in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-24-2016, 08:03 AM
  4. Zlin Cub S -- 180hp LSA Cub to be at Airventure
    By Darrel Starr in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 08-10-2013, 06:38 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •