---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 11/09/04: 14 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:56 AM - Re: 701 extra ribs? (jnbolding1) 2. 06:41 AM - Re: 701 extra ribs? (Larry) 3. 07:03 AM - Re: A Good Word for the FAA (Bruce Johnson) 4. 08:06 AM - Re: 701 extra ribs? (Keith Ashcraft) 5. 09:20 AM - Re: 701 extra ribs & nitrous sys (skyshops) 6. 10:04 AM - Re: Tire Mounting (Kent Brown) 7. 10:06 AM - N166DK CH601 HDS Crash (Richard Herndon) 8. 11:12 AM - Re: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 9. 11:53 AM - Hangar size for 601 sharing with another airplane? (Lance Gingell) 10. 04:57 PM - Re: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash (Larry McFarland) 11. 06:31 PM - Re: 701 extra ribs? (Larry) 12. 06:47 PM - upper fairlead, perhaps? (Jack Russell) 13. 07:16 PM - Re: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash (The Meiste's) 14. 07:17 PM - Re: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash (VideoFlyer@aol.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:56:26 AM PST US From: "jnbolding1" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs? --> Zenith-List message posted by: "jnbolding1" OH !! I thought we were talking about ZENITH wings .. you threw a sheep in there with the goats. Just because they are similar doesn't mean you can swap parts and come up with the same load paths and ultimate strengths. I don't know if it's still the case but I was told by Danny at Skyshops that airfoil shaped angles instead of full ribs were added to the three spots on the 701 wing where there is a lot of space between the ribs, this held oil canning to a minimum and resulted in more speed. However this gave no increase in gross weight .. Tried to get Chris to fess up on the wings used on the 701 in Europe (which are longer) but he wouldn't give any info, only saying that they didn't help or hurt. (I have a little problem with that assessment) LOW&SLOW John >Check their site, it's in one of the studies. > >http://www.dedaliusaviation.com/newdedalius/anglais.htm > >There are over 8 more sq ft of surface area, you figure. Larry N1345L > >Do Not Archive > > >> >> They add a little weight, but also increase >> >useful load by 100 pounds. >> >> >> Who says?? ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:41:37 AM PST US From: "Larry" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs? --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry" I guess I'm just confused. But adding more ribs to the ZENITH wing doesn't seem to me, I'm no engineer, could in any way add speed, it can only add strength. You have to reduce drag or increase power to get any more speed out of a Zenith wing. And you can only do that by changing the air foil or retracting the slats. I'm gonna go look at the Skyshops site and see what I see, but if I remember correctly they got their speed increase from a slicker cowling. Think I'll got tend the goats. Larry N1345L ----- Original Message ----- From: "jnbolding1" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs? > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "jnbolding1" > > OH !! I thought we were talking about ZENITH wings .. you threw a sheep in there with the goats. Just because they are similar doesn't mean you can swap parts and come up with the same load paths and ultimate strengths. > I don't know if it's still the case but I was told by Danny at Skyshops that airfoil shaped angles instead of full ribs were added to the three spots on the 701 wing where there is a lot of space between the ribs, this held oil canning to a minimum and resulted in more speed. However this gave no increase in gross weight .. Tried to get Chris to fess up on the wings used on the 701 in Europe (which are longer) but he wouldn't give any info, only saying that they didn't help or hurt. (I have a little problem with that assessment) LOW&SLOW John > > > >Check their site, it's in one of the studies. > > > >http://www.dedaliusaviation.com/newdedalius/anglais.htm > > > >There are over 8 more sq ft of surface area, you figure. Larry N1345L > > > >Do Not Archive > > > > > > >> > >> They add a little weight, but also increase > >> >useful load by 100 pounds. > >> > >> > >> Who says?? > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:03:10 AM PST US From: "Bruce Johnson" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: A Good Word for the FAA --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Johnson" Randy, How is your 601 performing with the corvair???? Are you getting the increase in performance you were expecting???? I'm in Schertz, TX so I want a ride!!! (ok, after your wife, and Leo... and ...) Bruce -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy Stout Subject: RE: Zenith-List: A Good Word for the FAA --> Zenith-List message posted by: Randy Stout Leo Have you flown a 601 before? I have about 14 more hours of test time on mine, then I'll be able to take passengers. I'll offer a familization ride after I'm finished. Hopefully before the end of the month. Only catch is that my wife has to get a ride first. She's been anxiously waiting for a long time. Randy Stout n282rs "at" earthlink.net www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21 --- ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 08:06:12 AM PST US From: Keith Ashcraft Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs? --> Zenith-List message posted by: Keith Ashcraft Hi Larry, I think what is being said is, if you can keep the oil-canning down to a minimum, then there is less drag and a smoother air-foil, hench a slightly faster airplane!! Keith ********************************************************************* Larry wrote: >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry" > >I guess I'm just confused. But adding more ribs to the ZENITH wing doesn't >seem to me, I'm no engineer, could in any way add speed, it can only add >strength. You have to reduce drag or increase power to get any more speed >out of a Zenith wing. And you can only do that by changing the air foil or >retracting the slats. I'm gonna go look at the Skyshops site and see what I >see, but if I remember correctly they got their speed increase from a >slicker cowling. Think I'll got tend the goats. Larry N1345L >----- Original Message ----- >From: "jnbolding1" >To: >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs? > > > > >>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "jnbolding1" >> >>OH !! I thought we were talking about ZENITH wings .. you threw a sheep >> >> >in there with the goats. Just because they are similar doesn't mean you can >swap parts and come up with the same load paths and ultimate strengths. > > >>I don't know if it's still the case but I was told by Danny at Skyshops >> >> >that airfoil shaped angles instead of full ribs were added to the three >spots on the 701 wing where there is a lot of space between the ribs, this >held oil canning to a minimum and resulted in more speed. However this gave >no increase in gross weight .. Tried to get Chris to fess up on the wings >used on the 701 in Europe (which are longer) but he wouldn't give any info, >only saying that they didn't help or hurt. (I have a little problem with >that assessment) LOW&SLOW John > > >> >> >>>Check their site, it's in one of the studies. >>> >>>http://www.dedaliusaviation.com/newdedalius/anglais.htm >>> >>>There are over 8 more sq ft of surface area, you figure. Larry N1345L >>> >>>Do Not Archive >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> They add a little weight, but also increase >>>> >>>> >>>>>useful load by 100 pounds. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>Who says?? >>>> >>>> >> >> > > > > -- ************************************* *Keith Ashcraft* ITT Industries Advanced Engineering & Sciences 5009 Centennial Blvd. Colorado Springs, CO 80919 (719) 599-1787 -- work (719) 332-4364 -- cell keith.ashcraft@itt.com ************************************ This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are proprietary and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of ITT Industries, Inc. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. ITT Industries accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. ************************************ ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:20:48 AM PST US From: "skyshops" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs & nitrous sys --> Zenith-List message posted by: "skyshops" Larry The extra ribs help only to keep down the oil canning. The speed increase comes from more streamlined cowling, new NACA induction system and different oil and radiator placement. And the nitrous system...just kidding.. Danny (SKYSHOPS.ORG) Hi Larry, I think what is being said is, if you can keep the oil-canning down to a minimum, then there is less drag and a smoother air-foil, hench a slightly faster airplane!! ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 10:04:42 AM PST US From: "Kent Brown" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Tire Mounting --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Kent Brown" Thanks to all for the help, the list always comes through! As a teenager, I did my obligatory stint in a "filling station", pumping gas, checking the oil, washing windshields, and fixing tires. Yes Virginia, we DID give full service then. There was always a can of Murphy's Tire Soap with a small piece of carpet on a wire for a brush to spread it around the bead of the tire sitting next to the tire machine. I guess the old training kicked in and I automatically went to get some Murphy's when I had tires to mount. A sign of age when you discover what you think is the "normal" way of doing things is now the "we used to" way. Thanks all. Kent 601HDS, mounting the tires! Do not archive ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 10:06:45 AM PST US From: Richard Herndon Subject: Zenith-List: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash --> Zenith-List message posted by: Richard Herndon List, Just found the following NTSB preliminary report on their web site. With sympathy for Andy and his test pilot's family I post the report. NTSB Identification: IAD05LA007 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Tuesday, October 26, 2004 in Leominster, MA Aircraft: SanClemente Zenith CH 601HDS, registration: N166DK Injuries: 1 Fatal. This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. On October 26, 2004, about 1540 eastern daylight time, a homebuilt Zenith CH 601HS, N166DK, was destroyed when it impacted a machine shop in Leominster, Massachusetts, shortly after takeoff from Fitchburg Municipal Airport (FIT), Fitchburg, Massachusetts. The certificated airline transport pilot was fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed for local flight test, conducted under 14 CFR Part 91. According to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector, the accident occurred during the airplane's first flight. The inspector also reported that the pilot had previously flight tested many other homebuilt airplanes. According to the owner/builder of the airplane, both he and the pilot conducted a thorough preflight, and the pilot subsequently started the airplane per the start-up checklist, with the owner/builder looking over his shoulder. The owner then reminded the pilot to remove the Ballistic Recovery System (BRS) safety pin prior to takeoff, and to double check the trim indications. The pilot then taxied to runway 32, and announced over the radio that he'd hold in the run-up area to allow the engine to warm up. About that time, the owner/builder reminded the pilot again, via hand-held radio, to double check the trim indications and make sure the BRS safety pin was removed. The pilot then taxied the airplane onto runway 32, announced his intentions, and stated that it was the airplane's first flight. The owner/builder observed the first part of the takeoff roll to be "completely normal, and there was no side-to-side motion of the aircraft and a rapid acceleration as he brought in full power." The engine sounded "smooth with no misfires or strange noises." As soon as the airplane lifted off the runway, it climbed to approximately 40-50 feet, while simultaneously veering to the left. It appeared that the pilot was "fighting for control" as the airplane "veered slightly back towards the runway." There may have been a reduction of engine power, but the owner/builder was not sure. The airplane then veered back towards the left, toward a tree line. As it approached the tree line, the engine noise grew "noticeably louder," and the airplane went into a "very nose-high attitude." The airplane "appeared to hang on the prop as it was pulled up and over [the] trees;" however, no stall occurred, and the engine "appeared to be working without any issue." According to another witness, a certificated flight instructor, he saw the accident airplane after it took off, and initially saw it 20-50 feet above the runway, near runway centerline, "but apparently experiencing what [he] believed was a stability or control problem." He saw the airplane "oscillating (porpoising?) in pitch, wings approximately level." The pilot then appeared to gain pitch control, and the airplane began a climbing left turn about 90 degrees from the runway heading, toward a tree line. The airplane then descended below and beyond the tree line, but subsequently came back up above it, and made another left turn back toward the airport. Then the airplane "banked steeply left, pitched down, and went into the trees in a steep nose-down and banked attitude (possibly stalled)." According to the FAA inspector, because the airplane was consumed in an intense post-impact fire, a detailed examination of the wreckage could not be made. The pilot held an airline transport pilot certificate for multi-engine airplanes. He also held a commercial pilot certificate for single engine land and sea airplanes, multi-engine sea airplanes, and gliders. According to his application for his latest FAA second class medical certificate, dated March 5, 2004, the pilot had accrued 5,250 hours of flight time. Weather at Fitchburg Airport, recorded at 1552, included clear skies, winds from 310 degrees true, variable between 290 degrees and 010 degrees true, at 9 knots. ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 11:12:48 AM PST US Subject: RE: Zenith-List: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" This is truly a tragic accident. For those of you getting near your first flight experience it might be worth just reviewing what this report described and making suggestions. It looks like the A/C was badly out of trim ("heavy" left wing and possibly for/aft) and it must be remembered that part of ZAC's instructions are to perform high speed taxi tests. Really a high spped taxi is flying the thing on the ground, in other words you should be able to feel what the airplane wants to do with the weight of the airplane on the wings. The other issue I have with many builders is they choose an airport with a short runway surrounded by trees. Many first flight flight accidents could have been avoided by choosing a more suitable airport, i.e long runway surrounded by flat fields. Yes you may have to travel and set it up with your DAR but surely better to do this and avoid disaster. When I did my high speed taxi it really was a first flight on a 6000ft runway and yes the wheels just left the ground...But I knew it flew straight before taking the plunge. Even using a quiet towerd controlled airport is a possibility. With great sadness... Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Herndon Subject: Zenith-List: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash --> Zenith-List message posted by: Richard Herndon --> List, Just found the following NTSB preliminary report on their web site. With sympathy for Andy and his test pilot's family I post the report. NTSB Identification: IAD05LA007 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Tuesday, October 26, 2004 in Leominster, MA Aircraft: SanClemente Zenith CH 601HDS, registration: N166DK Injuries: 1 Fatal. This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. On October 26, 2004, about 1540 eastern daylight time, a homebuilt Zenith CH 601HS, N166DK, was destroyed when it impacted a machine shop in Leominster, Massachusetts, shortly after takeoff from Fitchburg Municipal Airport (FIT), Fitchburg, Massachusetts. The certificated airline transport pilot was fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed for local flight test, conducted under 14 CFR Part 91. According to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector, the accident occurred during the airplane's first flight. The inspector also reported that the pilot had previously flight tested many other homebuilt airplanes. According to the owner/builder of the airplane, both he and the pilot conducted a thorough preflight, and the pilot subsequently started the airplane per the start-up checklist, with the owner/builder looking over his shoulder. The owner then reminded the pilot to remove the Ballistic Recovery System (BRS) safety pin prior to takeoff, and to double check the trim indications. The pilot then taxied to runway 32, and announced over the radio that he'd hold in the run-up area to allow the engine to warm up. About that time, the owner/builder reminded the pilot again, via hand-held radio, to double check the trim indications and make sure the BRS safety pin was removed. The pilot then taxied the airplane onto runway 32, announced his intentions, and stated that it was the airplane's first flight. The owner/builder observed the first part of the takeoff roll to be "completely normal, and there was no side-to-side motion of the aircraft and a rapid acceleration as he brought in full power." The engine sounded "smooth with no misfires or strange noises." As soon as the airplane lifted off the runway, it climbed to approximately 40-50 feet, while simultaneously veering to the left. It appeared that the pilot was "fighting for control" as the airplane "veered slightly back towards the runway." There may have been a reduction of engine power, but the owner/builder was not sure. The airplane then veered back towards the left, toward a tree line. As it approached the tree line, the engine noise grew "noticeably louder," and the airplane went into a "very nose-high attitude." The airplane "appeared to hang on the prop as it was pulled up and over [the] trees;" however, no stall occurred, and the engine "appeared to be working without any issue." According to another witness, a certificated flight instructor, he saw the accident airplane after it took off, and initially saw it 20-50 feet above the runway, near runway centerline, "but apparently experiencing what [he] believed was a stability or control problem." He saw the airplane "oscillating (porpoising?) in pitch, wings approximately level." The pilot then appeared to gain pitch control, and the airplane began a climbing left turn about 90 degrees from the runway heading, toward a tree line. The airplane then descended below and beyond the tree line, but subsequently came back up above it, and made another left turn back toward the airport. Then the airplane "banked steeply left, pitched down, and went into the trees in a steep nose-down and banked attitude (possibly stalled)." According to the FAA inspector, because the airplane was consumed in an intense post-impact fire, a detailed examination of the wreckage could not be made. The pilot held an airline transport pilot certificate for multi-engine airplanes. He also held a commercial pilot certificate for single engine land and sea airplanes, multi-engine sea airplanes, and gliders. According to his application for his latest FAA second class medical certificate, dated March 5, 2004, the pilot had accrued 5,250 hours of flight time. Weather at Fitchburg Airport, recorded at 1552, included clear skies, winds from 310 degrees true, variable between 290 degrees and 010 degrees true, at 9 knots. ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 11:53:17 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Hangar size for 601 sharing with another airplane? From: "Lance Gingell" --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Lance Gingell" Is anyone out there storing their 601 in a hangar with a PA28/Archer/Warrior or similar? I need some hangar sizing information. I'm planning on building a hangar on my property, and I'd like to make it just big enough to house a Piper PA28-xxx and a 601XL. However at this point my XL isn't finished and I don't have a Piper hanging around! I'd like to size it up, and see how big/small a hangar i'd need to squeeze these two in together. Cheers, ..lance Wings/tail complete. About to start fuse. ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 04:57:29 PM PST US From: "Larry McFarland" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" Though tragic, there is room to exercise improved awareness. Like you, I've read and reread the sequence of events here and there were two other things come to mind that could cause the HDS to be only half-stabilized in flight. Considering flight experience and the basic design of the HDS, it's hard to believe the aircraft could have been that far out of balance or trim. But, if it were a bit of either, the following items would aggravate the problem. If the propeller were inadvertently under-pitched, rpms would provide great acceleration, but be short of enough pitch to actually stay at a stable airspeed. The oscillating nose might have been just a repeated effort to stay in the air. The other is detail 2, the fairlead at bulkhead B5 for the elevator top bell crank. If the fairlead itself were ever to let go, the cable would have a lot of slack and up elevator would be reduced or not available. Trim and throttle would be the only alternative if that were the case. Though less likely, this was the item first thought of when reading the post clear thru. I put a couple of holes in the flange and made a U-shaped wire retainer that goes under the cable catching the bulkhead flange each side of the fairlead a year ago, because on hindsight, I didn't like rivets securing the nylon fairlead for the long term. It's got quite a divergent angle. We may never know what happened for sure, but our sympathies are with Andy and his family. Larry McFarland - 601HDS Subject: RE: Zenith-List: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > > > This is truly a tragic accident. ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 06:31:21 PM PST US From: "Larry" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs? --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry" I understood that was what they were getting at, you were just the first to say it. I believe anything that reduces drag helps, even if it can't be measured. I don't know how much they (Z-wings) beer can. If it were a lot, then stiffing would help with reducing drag, but how much I would think wouldn't be very much. And, if the beer canning is a lot, then there is a more sever issue than lost speed. Larry N1345L ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Ashcraft" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs? > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Keith Ashcraft > > > Hi Larry, > I think what is being said is, if you can keep the oil-canning down to a > minimum, then there is less drag and a smoother air-foil, hench a > slightly faster airplane!! > > Keith > ********************************************************************* > > Larry wrote: > > >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry" > > > >I guess I'm just confused. But adding more ribs to the ZENITH wing doesn't > >seem to me, I'm no engineer, could in any way add speed, it can only add > >strength. You have to reduce drag or increase power to get any more speed > >out of a Zenith wing. And you can only do that by changing the air foil or > >retracting the slats. I'm gonna go look at the Skyshops site and see what I > >see, but if I remember correctly they got their speed increase from a > >slicker cowling. Think I'll got tend the goats. Larry N1345L > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "jnbolding1" > >To: > >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 extra ribs? > > > > > > > > > >>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "jnbolding1" > >> > >>OH !! I thought we were talking about ZENITH wings .. you threw a sheep > >> > >> > >in there with the goats. Just because they are similar doesn't mean you can > >swap parts and come up with the same load paths and ultimate strengths. > > > > > >>I don't know if it's still the case but I was told by Danny at Skyshops > >> > >> > >that airfoil shaped angles instead of full ribs were added to the three > >spots on the 701 wing where there is a lot of space between the ribs, this > >held oil canning to a minimum and resulted in more speed. However this gave > >no increase in gross weight .. Tried to get Chris to fess up on the wings > >used on the 701 in Europe (which are longer) but he wouldn't give any info, > >only saying that they didn't help or hurt. (I have a little problem with > >that assessment) LOW&SLOW John > > > > > >> > >> > >>>Check their site, it's in one of the studies. > >>> > >>>http://www.dedaliusaviation.com/newdedalius/anglais.htm > >>> > >>>There are over 8 more sq ft of surface area, you figure. Larry N1345L > >>> > >>>Do Not Archive > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> They add a little weight, but also increase > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>useful load by 100 pounds. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>Who says?? > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > ************************************* > > *Keith Ashcraft* > > ITT Industries > > Advanced Engineering & Sciences > > 5009 Centennial Blvd. > > Colorado Springs, CO > > 80919 > > (719) 599-1787 -- work > > (719) 332-4364 -- cell > > keith.ashcraft@itt.com > > > ************************************ > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are proprietary and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of ITT Industries, Inc. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. ITT Industries accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. > ************************************ > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 06:47:54 PM PST US From: Jack Russell Subject: Zenith-List: upper fairlead, perhaps? --> Zenith-List message posted by: Jack Russell Larry: I agree with you on this one. I was also bothered with the fairlead so I made a reinforcing backing plate (see pg 1 pg my page). Jack in Clovis cA --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" The other is detail 2, the fairlead at bulkhead B5 for the elevator top bell crank. If the fairlead itself were ever to let go, the cable would have a lot of slack and up elevator would be reduced or not available. Trim and throttle would be the only alternative if that were the case. Though less likely, this was the item first thought of when reading the post clear thru. I put a couple of holes in the flange and made a U-shaped wire retainer that goes under the cable catching the bulkhead flange each side of the fairlead a year ago, because on hindsight, I didn't like rivets securing the nylon fairlead for the long term. It's got quite a divergent angle. Jack Russell -Clovis CA 601 XL Jabiru 3300 Progress update at: http://www.geocities.com/clojan@sbcglobal.net/zodiacbarn.html ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 07:16:09 PM PST US From: "The Meiste's" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash --> Zenith-List message posted by: "The Meiste's" >the fairlead at bulkhead B5 for the elevator top bell > crank. If the fairlead itself were ever to let go, the cable would have a > lot of slack and up elevator would be reduced or not available. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ That is scary now that you mention it Larry, good observation. Especially if one were to install the rivet head on the aluminum bulkhead side and the stem going into the plastic fairlead WITHOUT a backup washer. Sounds like I'll be cutting an inspection panel soon. Kelly ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 07:17:05 PM PST US From: VideoFlyer@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: N166DK CH601 HDS Crash --> Zenith-List message posted by: VideoFlyer@aol.com In a message dated 11/9/04 , larrymc@qconline.com writes: > << great acceleration, but be short of enough pitch to actually stay at a stable > airspeed. The oscillating nose might have been just a repeated effort to stay > in the air.>>>> As I was reading the description, I thought, too, that perhaps the prop was underpitched. It sounds like the engine was running fine. A louder sound as the plane turned could be attributed to the prop's axis changing in relation to the listener.