Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:08 AM - Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders (Mike)
2. 12:25 AM - Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders (Craig Payne)
3. 01:38 AM - Re: Landing Lights (jetboy)
4. 03:23 AM - Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders (David Downey)
5. 03:23 AM - Re: Fuel Line Length between Wing Tank and Selector Valve? (David Downey)
6. 04:50 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (ashontz)
7. 04:55 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (ashontz)
8. 04:56 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (ashontz)
9. 04:56 AM - Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders (David Downey)
10. 05:35 AM - Re: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (William Dominguez)
11. 06:17 AM - Re: design changes elevator (ZodieRocket)
12. 06:22 AM - HDS / Corvair Cruise Speed (Gary Boothe)
13. 06:22 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (Gig Giacona)
14. 06:36 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (ashontz)
15. 06:36 AM - 99.99999% (Aaron Gustafson)
16. 06:41 AM - 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
17. 06:46 AM - Fuel Line Length (Scott Thatcher)
18. 06:46 AM - Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders (Michael Valentine)
19. 06:48 AM - Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders (ashontz)
20. 06:57 AM - Re: 99.99999% (Jim Hoak)
21. 06:58 AM - 701 project (Donna West)
22. 07:04 AM - Re: Re: design changes elevator (David Downey)
23. 07:18 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (cbaron66)
24. 07:22 AM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Paul Mulwitz)
25. 07:24 AM - Re: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (David Mikesell)
26. 07:34 AM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
27. 07:35 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (Matt Ronics)
28. 07:43 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (ashontz)
29. 08:02 AM - Re: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (Gary Boothe)
30. 08:05 AM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Gary Boothe)
31. 08:16 AM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
32. 08:39 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (cbaron66)
33. 08:47 AM - Re: Landing Lights (hansriet)
34. 08:51 AM - Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders ()
35. 08:57 AM - Re: Selective posting (rickpitcher)
36. 08:58 AM - Re: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (LarryMcFarland)
37. 09:10 AM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ZodieRocket)
38. 09:21 AM - wings (john butterfield)
39. 09:32 AM - Re: Fuel Line Length (Dino Bortolin)
40. 09:34 AM - Re: Re: Landing Lights ()
41. 09:36 AM - Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (cbaron66)
42. 09:37 AM - Nr of 601XLs registered in US was Re: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (T. Graziano)
43. 09:41 AM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
44. 09:52 AM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Tom Henderson)
45. 10:03 AM - Re: wings (Gary Boothe)
46. 10:19 AM - Re: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes (Paul Mulwitz)
47. 10:23 AM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
48. 10:29 AM - Re: Want to Sell your XL ? (japhillipsga@aol.com)
49. 10:29 AM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
50. 10:56 AM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Gary Boothe)
51. 11:13 AM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Jeyoung65@aol.com)
52. 11:13 AM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Gig Giacona)
53. 11:16 AM - Re: 701 project (LINLARMAYES@aol.com)
54. 11:22 AM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Gary Boothe)
55. 11:40 AM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (John Bolding)
56. 11:40 AM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings ()
57. 11:56 AM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
58. 11:57 AM - Re: Fuel Line Length between Wing Tank and Selector Valve? (PatrickW)
59. 12:08 PM - winpy looking wings, RV vs HDS (Peter Chapman)
60. 12:21 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Dan)
61. 12:48 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (William Dominguez)
62. 12:48 PM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Gig Giacona)
63. 12:54 PM - The last word . . . I hope. (Paul Mulwitz)
64. 01:00 PM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
65. 01:11 PM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Gig Giacona)
66. 01:11 PM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
67. 01:13 PM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
68. 01:39 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Jerry Hey)
69. 02:07 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Jaybannist@cs.com)
70. 02:13 PM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ashontz)
71. 02:22 PM - Re: Re: Landing Lights (Craig Payne)
72. 03:56 PM - Zenith Zip Fly-in or Drive -in (ZodieRocket)
73. 04:07 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Stephen R. Look)
74. 04:31 PM - wing baggage fasteners (john butterfield)
75. 04:38 PM - Re: Re: 701 wing strut (Flydog1966@aol.com)
76. 05:00 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Juan Vega)
77. 05:07 PM - Re: wing baggage fasteners (Randy Stout)
78. 05:16 PM - Re: wing baggage fasteners (ALAN BEYER)
79. 05:23 PM - Re: wing baggage fasteners (Gary Boothe)
80. 05:31 PM - Re: wing baggage fasteners (LarryMcFarland)
81. 06:13 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ZodieRocket)
82. 06:39 PM - Re: Re: Dynon installation (Bill Naumuk)
83. 07:04 PM - Tire Pressure (robert stone)
84. 07:09 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (William Dominguez)
85. 07:12 PM - Rudder cables exiting rear fuslage (AZFlyer)
86. 07:22 PM - Re: Landing Lights (Ron Lendon)
87. 07:37 PM - Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (Ron Lendon)
88. 08:04 PM - Re: Tire Pressure (george may)
89. 08:05 PM - Re: Rudder cables exiting rear fuslage (Paul Mulwitz)
90. 08:06 PM - Re: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings (ZodieRocket)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders |
>I hope that some testing has been done on an airframe built by some >Joe like
me.
Not sure where I read this, but my understanding is that a long time ago ZAC intentionally
built a shoddy airplane, leaving out a bunch of rivets, not using
anything to measure accurately, etc just to see if the plane would still function.
The results were that it apparently flew just fine. Again, since I can't
recall the source, and maybe I'm just hoping it's true, so take this for what
it's worth. But if true, then hopefully there's enough slop built into the design
so that morons like me can build something that will actually get off the
ground without falling apart. That is, if I can ever finish the damn thing. :)
Mike F.
601XL, Jab 3300
do not archive
---------------------------------
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders |
Well, there was that 601HDS they built and flew at SnF in a week with
volunteer labor. I wonder where it is now?
http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/7dw.html
-- Craig
_____
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 1:04 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders
>I hope that some testing has been done on an airframe built by some >Joe
like me.
Not sure where I read this, but my understanding is that a long time ago ZAC
intentionally built a shoddy airplane, leaving out a bunch of rivets, not
using anything to measure accurately, etc just to see if the plane would
still function. The results were that it apparently flew just fine. Again,
since I can't recall the source, and maybe I'm just hoping it's true, so
take this for what it's worth. But if true, then hopefully there's enough
slop built into the design so that morons like me can build something that
will actually get off the ground without falling apart. That is, if I can
ever finish the damn thing. :)
Mike F.
601XL, Jab 3300
do not archive
_____
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
Play
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48223/*http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamek
ey=monopolyherenow> Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy)
at Yahoo! Games.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Landing Lights |
I got the best results from a newer design QH lamp from Philips: called the masterline
series, part 124508. This is a 12V, 8 degrees beam lamp at 45 watts which
replaces the previous 75 watts type for same light output. So you can run
two of these for less drain than the GE4509 thats used on most GA aircraft. My
Cessna 150a had 2 in the wing, the taxi light tilted inwards and downwards and
switched progressively from the single pull switch, thats more load than the
generator could actually sustain.
I originally tried a wider beam, but the light was spread too thinly in this case.
Observers have said the new light is noticably bright, during daylight approaches.
Its on the left wing, used as a landing light, and would be adequate
as taxi light.
Ralph
--------
Ralph - CH701 / 2200a
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113267#113267
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders |
Since you used my name in vain I thought I would mention something relevant in
passing.
Back in the 70s we did a lot of testing to determine the effects on fastener behavior
with regard to burrs, etc.
The ideal deburring tool would be a (very sharp) 170-175 included piloted countersink
bit in a microstop. With that you could remove the burr and set the depth
to avoid cutting past the hole/surface point. With such a bit you could even
mount it in a hand held (in my case, the center shaft of an old worn out microstop)
and get better results that with other methods.
I have been looking into redesigning a fluteless countersink to do the above but
have no results to report yet.
The single most important steps to minimize the effects of hole defects and bad
fastening practice is keep tools sharp, sharp, sharp... use beeswax or similar
lubricant, ALWAYS drill/ream to net in steps to minimize the burr formation
in the first place. Using roughly double the Cleco count recommended is never
a bad idea - and they can be sold without losing a cent on eBay when you are done
with them (although you.will develop a love relationship with them and never
want to part with them). Drill out all patterns from the center of the assembly
progressively and Cleco aggressively as you go.
With the XL, there are a large number of assemblies that are poorly sequenced so
that you cannot deburr all faces of all components in an assembly. Think through
every step to allow maximum cleanout at each step size and consider reaming
the rivet holes from .125 to #30 for example. The mors Clecos you use, the
tighter the assembly faying faces will fit and the less burr formation at the
interfaces.
(Just my .02, .02, .02...!)
Michael Valentine <mgvalentine@gmail.com> wrote: Though I generally believe in
CH and the design of the 601XL, I do hope the testing he has done and continues
to do factors in true "amateur" building in some way. I was just looking back
through the archives and noticed David Downey's observation (for which I imagine
he has the credentials to back up) that we amateurs may sometimes make potentially
dangerous gouges along the rivet line using the file deburring method.
Deburring is just a pet peeve of mine. I understand the goal, but I really
believe I have no way of practically achieving it. (BTW, it simply makes no
logical sense that one can use a drill bit or countersink to deburr a whole
without slightly angling the edge or leaving a slight ridge. My chances of using
an angle to cut away excess material and leave a 90 deg. corner are one in
a million in my book.) So what is worse, a scratch, an angle, or a ridge?
Anyway, to get to the point. I hope that some testing has been done on an airframe
built by some Joe like me. Perhaps he has tested one of the planes built
in 7 days at an airshow; maybe he has had some yahoo off the street build something
to test. I don't know. But I would like to hear that he is not solely
testing a "professionally" built airframe that someone with decades of experience
carefully constructed.
My $.02.
Michael in NH
do not archive
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
Zodiac 601XL/Corvair?
---------------------------------
Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware
protection.
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Line Length between Wing Tank and Selector Valve? |
what a great idea!
way better than what was taught about using welding rod for a template (although
the rod does work pretty well for tubing runs)
Dave Thompson <dave.thompson@verizon.net> wrote: st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui)
} Patrick,
I am not building yet and cannot give you any dimensions. However, I have done
similar fuel line runs on a speed boat using steel braded lines. I went to Home
Depot and purchased a length of cheap clear hose the same diameter. I ran
the hose as needed and cut it to length. I removed the clear hose and used it
as a template, installing the steel braded connectors on the workbench.
Just my two cents worth
Dave Thompson
Westminster, CA
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
Zodiac 601XL/Corvair?
---------------------------------
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
Hey, I'll be behind a Corvair too.
What's cruise on the HDS with a Corvair?
gboothe5(at)comcast.net wrote:
> Whew!!! I'm glad to hear you say that! I truly hope that someday we can fly
> wingtip to wingtip and compare the oil canning we each have in our
> respective wings - you in an XL and me in an HDS.
>
> Of course, I'll be flying behind a Corvair, so I may have to throttle back a
> little.... ;)
>
> Gary Boothe
> Cool, CA
> 601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
> Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
>
> .. I'm asking you, after all this intellectual discussion, after
>
> > looking at your web sight and all your careful work, are you going to
> > install more ribs & beef up your spar?
> >
> > Gary Boothe
> > Cool, CA
> > 601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
> > Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
> >
> > --
> >
> >
>
>
> I'll check with Zenith first as far as official analysis goes. I'm not
> looking forward to extra work, but if I feel it needs it and there analysis
> shows no negative effects I will do it. I don't think I'll mess with the
> spar. I have .040 for spar cap angles as it is, the extrusion was just an
> after thought. It wouldn't be too hard to install more ribs, making them
> will be a pain in the ass because I hated making the forms. They're reall
> time consuming.
>
> --------
> Andy Shontz
> CH601XL - Corvair
> www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113198#113198
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113273#113273
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
Thank you! Thank you!
Yes, the possibility is there (just like in these other examples) that something
could in fact be wrong with the XL wing that isn't showing up til now, and not
only that, but it's something that doesn't present itself often under most
conditions. Not only that, but there were mods made to these other planes that
fixed the problem. That's all I was getting at and then just interpretting what
I believe could be a problem, which I think may be slightly anemic twist resistance
due to widely spaced ribs.
skyguynca wrote:
> Wow, this discussion has really gotten to comparing apples and oranges.
> True we all need to wait and see what CH has to say after the new test.
> I built a HD and will build another one but trying to compare it to the
> XL??? You can't two different airplanes. Personally I don't understand the
> rush to build a XL, the HD and HDS performance and durability is proven and
> the HD will fit in Sport Pilot. IT is a much simpler airplane. Oh and yes I
> do have plans for the HD (new set just purchased for my second build), HDS
> wing plans also and yes the XL plans.
>
> One thing we might all remember, there have been several planes built by
> factories with lots of really smart and cutting edge aerodynamicists and
> engineers. Some of these planes were built really well and proven in public
> service over years....before they started coming apart due to unforseen
> problems. The Nimrod is just one example....it went into public and military
> service for a few years before the airframes started cracking and failing.
> There are several others too, google it. As far as dynamic with instability
> and flutter, google that too, there are several designs that had to be
> modified because the condition very rarely presented itself but when it did
> it was catastrophic. Trying to duplicate the condition was hard and almost
> impossible on the ground. Through careful flight testing, taking baby steps
> to completely simulate the conditions that caused the wing flutter it
> happened. It was studied and then the wing modified to keep the planes in
> service.
>
> The whole point is people need to quit saying "the wing has a problem"
> because it might not. Also people need to quit saying "it is a proven design
> and hundreds are flying" because again, that is not true either. I did a FAA
> registraition search and it only comes up with 132 601XL's in the USA. Out
> of that only 89 carry a current airworthiness which means the others are not
> flying yet. I am not discounting ones in other countries but lets not
> stretch the truth about the number of actually flying ones. Also everyone
> keeps saying the pilots over stressed the plane either thru rough air faster
> than Va or Vne, no one knows that except the one who died in the plane.
>
> Lets just wait and see what CH comes up with, also see if any more instances
> happen.
>
> David Mikesell
> 23597 N. Hwy 99
> Acampo, CA 95220
> 209-224-4485
> skyguynca@skyguynca.com
> www.skyguynca.com
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113274#113274
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
robert.eli(at)comcast.net wrote:
> David and other interested folks,
>
> Thanks for the reminder that flutter can be a very tough problem to
> diagnose. My earlier comments about the possibility of XL wing flutter were
> made prior to the announcement that Chris Heintz was going to do a complete
> review of the structural design of the XL. My original concern was that our
> many good friends on this Zenith list were overlooking the flutter
> possibility. That is no longer an issue, given the many comments exchanged
> regarding this mode of failure over the past week. Now, I am confident that
> Chris will thoroughly revisit every aspect of the wing design to assure that
> the XL remains one of the best homebuilt designs available. I now will sign
> off on this topic and return to building.
>
> Bob Eli
>
> ---
Seeing as how I'm working on the wings at the moment, I wonder if I should just
put them aside til this is worked out and start building the fuselage.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113276#113276
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders |
I forgot one of the most important aspects of the question: is it better to have
a vestigial burr on mating faces or a (very slight) countersink? Since a large
part of the load transfer function of riveted or bolted structure occurs through
frictional shear transfer between the clamped faces, it is critical to ensure
that those faces are sheared up at the periphery of the fastener hole. Therefore,
my choice would be the (very slight) countersink.
David Downey <planecrazydld@yahoo.com> wrote: Since you used my name in vain I
thought I would mention something relevant in passing.
Back in the 70s we did a lot of testing to determine the effects on fastener behavior
with regard to burrs, etc.
The ideal deburring tool would be a (very sharp) 170-175 included piloted countersink
bit in a microstop. With that you could remove the burr and set the depth
to avoid cutting past the hole/surface point. With such a bit you could even
mount it in a hand held (in my case, the center shaft of an old worn out microstop)
and get better results that with other methods.
I have been looking into redesigning a fluteless countersink to do the above but
have no results to report yet.
The single most important steps to minimize the effects of hole defects and bad
fastening practice is keep tools sharp, sharp, sharp... use beeswax or similar
lubricant, ALWAYS drill/ream to net in steps to minimize the burr formation
in the first place. Using roughly double the Cleco count recommended is never
a bad idea - and they can be sold without losing a cent on eBay when you are done
with them (although you.will develop a love relationship with them and never
want to part with them). Drill out all patterns from the center of the assembly
progressively and Cleco aggressively as you go.
With the XL, there are a large number of assemblies that are poorly sequenced so
that you cannot deburr all faces of all components in an assembly. Think through
every step to allow maximum cleanout at each step size and consider reaming
the rivet holes from .125 to #30 for example. The mors Clecos you use, the
tighter the assembly faying faces will fit and the less burr formation at the
interfaces.
(Just my .02, .02, .02...!)
Michael Valentine <mgvalentine@gmail.com> wrote: Though I generally believe in
CH and the design of the 601XL, I do hope the testing he has done and continues
to do factors in true "amateur" building in some way. I was just looking back
through the archives and noticed David Downey's observation (for which I imagine
he has the credentials to back up) that we amateurs may sometimes make
potentially dangerous gouges along the rivet line using the file deburring method.
Deburring is just a pet peeve of mine. I understand the goal, but I really
believe I have no way of practically achieving it. (BTW, it simply makes
no logical sense that one can use a drill bit or countersink to deburr a whole
without slightly angling the edge or leaving a slight ridge. My chances of using
an angle to cut away excess material and leave a 90 deg. corner are one in
a million in my book.) So what is worse, a scratch, an angle, or a ridge?
Anyway, to get to the point. I hope that some testing has been done on an airframe
built by some
---------------------------------
Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware
protection.
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
Zodiac 601XL/Corvair?
---------------------------------
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
David Mikesell <skyguynca@skyguynca.com> wrote:I did a FAA
registraition search and it only comes up with 132 601XL's in the USA. Out
of that only 89 carry a current airworthiness which means the others are not
flying yet. How and where did you make the search. I'm using this page:
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/acftref_inquiry.asp
and I don't get more than 13.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami, Florida
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: design changes elevator |
-----Original Message-----
It is these random design
changes made by the local ZAC engineers (note that CH has retired to
France) that concern me personally the most.
Paul
XL fuselage
-----------------
Chris is retired, but only from the everyday operation of the business,
his fax machine is in full operation and all design changes to his
aircraft come from his hand and mouth. Chris has a dream of building his
house and writing his book, both of which are progressing well. He is
still actively designing planes and is still involved with the overall
company.
Chris will never be fully retired, as was shown at Sun-N-Fun. Chris
showed up for a few days to do some forums and the BBQ. Will he be there
next year? Who knows, it depends on how he feels now, not on the
commitments of the business.
Some have expressed a difference in view of the plans as if they were
done by a different hand, well yes they were. Chris does not operate a
computer, all his updates and changes are hand drawn and submitted to
ZAC for inclusion in the next release of the plans, typically done by
Nick Heintz.
Most changes have been for the LSA market, like the elevator trim. IT
went from a small internal part to an external part, to a full span
part. Why?
Simple lets break it down, the small flush trim tab (1st one) works
great in flight is easy to trim for normal conditions, however at full
flaps there is still a bit of back pressure on the stick, of which you
cannot trim all of it out. Big deal? Not to me, my plane remains with
the small trim tab.
SO next came the external trim, works exceptionally well, but people
didn't like the look, which seldom matters to Chris, he is much more of
a function over form guy, need proof, look at a 701. ( each of us view
beauty differently, I consider the 701 a functional beauty)
Now the full size trim, this eliminates all stick pressure at full flaps
, however it makes in-flight trimming a little more difficult. Meets the
LSA standard and is now what is in the plans.
Chris made each and every change, submitted it and was included in the
next release of the plans.
Mark
6:05 PM
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | HDS / Corvair Cruise Speed |
It was a tongue-in-cheek comment. I don't know if anyone has posted any
numbers on an HDS with a Corvair. Anyhow, I think we each write our own
book, as every plane is an individual with performance #'s depending on
rigging, weight, design (tricycle vs. taildragger), prop choice, etc.
I would be happy with 120 and ecstatic with 130 (mph). Anything over that
will be a bonus. ZAC says 135 (with their engine of choice).
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ashontz
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 4:50 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes
Hey, I'll be behind a Corvair too.
What's cruise on the HDS with a Corvair?
gboothe5(at)comcast.net wrote:
> Whew!!! I'm glad to hear you say that! I truly hope that someday we can
fly
> wingtip to wingtip and compare the oil canning we each have in our
> respective wings - you in an XL and me in an HDS.
>
> Of course, I'll be flying behind a Corvair, so I may have to throttle back
a
> little.... ;)
>
> Gary Boothe
> Cool, CA
> 601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
> Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
Use that link and just put 601XL in the model name. Don't put anything in the Manufacturer
Name spot.
[quote="bill_dom(at)yahoo.com"]How and where did you make the search. I'm using
this page:
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/acftref_inquiry.asp
and I don't get more than 13.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami, Florida
> [b]
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113295#113295
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
Even more reason for more testing.
[quote="Gig Giacona"]Use that link and just put 601XL in the model name. Don't
put anything in the Manufacturer Name spot.
bill_dom(at)yahoo.com wrote:
> How and where did you make the search. I'm using this page:
>
> http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/acftref_inquiry.asp
>
> and I don't get more than 13.
>
> William Dominguez
> Zodiac 601XL Plans
> Miami, Florida
>
> > [b]
>
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113301#113301
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
N797AT has W&B done (yesterday), airworthiness certification request packet
sent in, just waiting. Fideling with weatherstrips, placards, stationary
tests and minor adjustments.
Almost there. February 1996- now.
Aaron do not archive
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Considering all the talk about wing testing of the 601XL by Zenith, I'm considering
putting them aside for now and working on the fuselage. I'm confident that
Zenith will rectify any problems if found. That being the case, what problems
will I encounter if I build the fuselage first? One problem I see is the center
spar. I have one side drilled for the wing root and one side not drilled.
If I start building the fuselage around it will I be able to pull it out with
out a problem to set the dihedral on the table? Can I build most of the fuselage
without the center spar and install the spar at a later time? I just want to
keep moving forward and figured now may be a good time to start on the fuselage
til we get official word on the wing tests and if there's any corrective actions
that need to be taken.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113305#113305
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fuel Line Length |
Dave,
Great idea... I can't believe I never thought about doing it that way.
The concept would also work for any other lines needed including control
cables, brakes lines, etc..
Thanks again!
Scott
<<I am not building yet and cannot give you any dimensions. However, I
have
done similar fuel line runs on a speed boat using steel braded lines. I
went
to Home Depot and purchased a length of cheap clear hose the same
diameter.
I ran the hose as needed and cut it to length. I removed the clear hose
and
used it as a template, installing the steel braded connectors on the
workbench. ... Dave Thompson>>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders |
I know they can fly (and I'm sure mine will as well), but I think the
general concerns about inflight failures goes well beyond that
characteristic! I would hope that my joe-built plane still withstands the
rated g forces and doesn't prematurely age because I used a file to deburr
or because I nicked something or because I only had 5.5mm in one spot
instead of the "absolute" minimum 6mm or because .... You get the picture!
Michael
do not archive
On 5/17/07, Craig Payne <craig@craigandjean.com> wrote:
>
> Well, there was that 601HDS they built and flew at SnF in a week with
> volunteer labor. I wonder where it is now?
>
> http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/7dw.html
>
> -- Craig
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Mike
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 17, 2007 1:04 AM
> *To:* zenith-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: Zenith-List: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders
>
>
> >I hope that some testing has been done on an airframe built by some >Joe
> like me.
>
> Not sure where I read this, but my understanding is that a long time ago
> ZAC intentionally built a shoddy airplane, leaving out a bunch of rivets,
> not using anything to measure accurately, etc just to see if the plane would
> still function. The results were that it apparently flew just fine. Again,
> since I can't recall the source, and maybe I'm just hoping it's true, so
> take this for what it's worth. But if true, then hopefully there's enough
> slop built into the design so that morons like me can build something that
> will actually get off the ground without falling apart. That is, if I can
> ever finish the damn thing. :)
>
> Mike F.
> 601XL, Jab 3300
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders |
ZAC actually recommends using a large drill bit for deburring. I used one for my
tail sections. However, a fellow builder recommended using the round Scotch
Brite pads on a die grinder. Works nice and it's fast and no gouging of the hole.
I intend to ream all of the holes from here on out too, especially on the
wings.
[quote="Michael Valentine"]Though I generally believe in CH and the design of the
601XL, I do hope the testing he has done and continues to do factors in true
"amateur" building in some way. I was just looking back through the archives
and noticed David Downey's observation (for which I imagine he has the credentials
to back up) that we amateurs may sometimes make potentially dangerous gouges
along the rivet line using the file deburring method. Deburring is just
a pet peeve of mine. I understand the goal, but I really believe I have no way
of practically achieving it. (BTW, it simply makes no logical sense that one
can use a drill bit or countersink to deburr a whole without slightly angling
the edge or leaving a slight ridge. My chances of using an angle to cut away
excess material and leave a 90 deg. corner are one in a million in my book.)
So what is worse, a scratch, an angle, or a ridge?
Anyway, to get to the point. I hope that some testing has been done on an airframe
built by some Joe like me. Perhaps he has tested one of the planes built
in 7 days at an airshow; maybe he has had some yahoo off the street build something
to test. I don't know. But I would like to hear that he is not solely
testing a "professionally" built airframe that someone with decades of experience
carefully constructed.
My $.02.
Michael in NH
do not archive
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113308#113308
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Congratulations Aaron. I've heard ( unconfirmed ) that percentage wise, more
Zenith aircraft are completed by the original purchaserer than most other
homebuilts. Also, if you haven't done so, I urge you to communicate with an
EAA Flight Advisor before you make that first flight, reguardless of your
experience level. Good luck!!
do not archive
Jim Hoak
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Gustafson" <agustafson@chartermi.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 8:36 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: 99.99999%
> <agustafson@chartermi.net>
>
> N797AT has W&B done (yesterday), airworthiness certification request
> packet sent in, just waiting. Fideling with weatherstrips, placards,
> stationary tests and minor adjustments.
> Almost there. February 1996- now.
>
> Aaron do not archive
>
>
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
If anyone is interested in buying my project, plesae contact me at 520 455 5181.
Great price, includes Turbo Suzuki w/ redrive. Thanks, Allan
---------------------------------
Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: design changes elevator |
thank you for the clarification.
do not archive
ZodieRocket <zodierocket@hsfx.ca> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
It is these random design
changes made by the local ZAC engineers (note that CH has retired to
France) that concern me personally the most.
Paul
XL fuselage
-----------------
Chris is retired, but only from the everyday operation of the business,
his fax machine is in full operation and all design changes to his
aircraft come from his hand and mouth. Chris has a dream of building his
house and writing his book, both of which are progressing well. He is
still actively designing planes and is still involved with the overall
company.
Chris will never be fully retired, as was shown at Sun-N-Fun. Chris
showed up for a few days to do some forums and the BBQ. Will he be there
next year? Who knows, it depends on how he feels now, not on the
commitments of the business.
Some have expressed a difference in view of the plans as if they were
done by a different hand, well yes they were. Chris does not operate a
computer, all his updates and changes are hand drawn and submitted to
ZAC for inclusion in the next release of the plans, typically done by
Nick Heintz.
Most changes have been for the LSA market, like the elevator trim. IT
went from a small internal part to an external part, to a full span
part. Why?
Simple lets break it down, the small flush trim tab (1st one) works
great in flight is easy to trim for normal conditions, however at full
flaps there is still a bit of back pressure on the stick, of which you
cannot trim all of it out. Big deal? Not to me, my plane remains with
the small trim tab.
SO next came the external trim, works exceptionally well, but people
didn't like the look, which seldom matters to Chris, he is much more of
a function over form guy, need proof, look at a 701. ( each of us view
beauty differently, I consider the 701 a functional beauty)
Now the full size trim, this eliminates all stick pressure at full flaps
, however it makes in-flight trimming a little more difficult. Meets the
LSA standard and is now what is in the plans.
Chris made each and every change, submitted it and was included in the
next release of the plans.
Mark
6:05 PM
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
Zodiac 601XL/Corvair?
---------------------------------
Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
I'm a long time lurker here, but this is my first post on this forum. I've been
considering the 601XL for quite some time, but my only experiance with CH designs
has been repairing a hail damaged HDS. I don't know the PC way to say this
so please forgive my potential faux pas. I felt the HDS was wimpy enough(relative
to RVs), but now there may be potential for the wings to fall off the XL?
Man, this is not making my desicion on what kitplane to buy any simpler. If
you guys feel the need to flame me go ahead.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113321#113321
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
The standard build order starts with the rudder and tail parts, then
goes to wings, and finally fuselage.
I think one important reason for this is education of the
builder. It is much less expensive in both time and money to make
mistakes on the simpler and smaller parts. The fuselage is A LOT
more complicated and difficult to build than the rest of the
plane. You are less likely to make a huge mistake on the fuselage
after building the rest of the parts.
I consider this issue a lot more important to an individual builder's
issues than the possibility that there may be a major design change
at some undetermined time in the future. It may be that there is no
design change at all, or a big change might be some place other than
the wings.
I am not saying I am not concerned about the structural failures. I
only think that the likelihood of a big fix in the near future is
very small. Also, my concern is large, but the real danger of a
structural failure in any single 601XL with the current design is
still very small. It may turn out (much to my frustration) that the
failures are simply results from overstressing the planes or improper
cable tensions and if you keep within design limits you will be just fine.
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive
At 06:40 AM 5/17/2007, you wrote:
>
>Considering all the talk about wing testing of the 601XL by Zenith,
>I'm considering putting them aside for now and working on the
>fuselage. I'm confident that Zenith will rectify any problems if
>found. That being the case, what problems will I encounter if I
>build the fuselage first? One problem I see is the center spar. I
>have one side drilled for the wing root and one side not drilled. If
>I start building the fuselage around it will I be able to pull it
>out with out a problem to set the dihedral on the table? Can I build
>most of the fuselage without the center spar and install the spar at
>a later time? I just want to keep moving forward and figured now may
>be a good time to start on the fuselage til we get official word on
>the wing tests and if there's any corrective actions that need to be taken.
>
>--------
>Andy Shontz
>CH601XL - Corvair
>www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113305#113305
>
>
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
You have to make a variety of entries. Depending on how they registered
their airplane such as 601XL, 601-XL, XL601 ...etc
You have the right link
David Mikesell
23597 N. Hwy 99
Acampo, CA 95220
209-224-4485
skyguynca@skyguynca.com
www.skyguynca.com
----- Original Message -----
From: William Dominguez
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 5:32 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes
David Mikesell <skyguynca@skyguynca.com> wrote:
I did a FAA
registraition search and it only comes up with 132 601XL's in the
USA. Out
of that only 89 carry a current airworthiness which means the others
are not
flying yet.
How and where did you make the search. I'm using this page:
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/acftref_inquiry.asp
and I don't get more than 13.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami, Florida
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
I thought about that too, the fact that a design change (if it occurs) would also
be to the fuselage itself, unlikely though.
I'm very comfortable with my bulding skills at this point so switching to the fuselage
doesn't bother me. I think you learn a lot more building from plans.
I'm just wondering if I'd be painting myself into a corner if I have to pull out
the center spar temporarily to set the dyhedral and I can't. I see that as the
biggest show stopper to building the fuselage at this point.
Believe me, I've actually entertained the idea of just stopping work all together
on the XL and ordering plans for an HD. Wouldn't take me anywhere near as long
to rebuild. I wouldn't be surprised if the HD uses the same stabilizer, elevator,
and rudder (not saying it does, I don't know) so all I'd really be shit
out of would be the time and a couple hundred dollars building the right wing.
p.mulwitz(at)worldnet.att wrote:
> The standard build order starts with the rudder and tail parts, then
> goes to wings, and finally fuselage.
>
> I think one important reason for this is education of the
> builder. It is much less expensive in both time and money to make
> mistakes on the simpler and smaller parts. The fuselage is A LOT
> more complicated and difficult to build than the rest of the
> plane. You are less likely to make a huge mistake on the fuselage
> after building the rest of the parts.
>
> I consider this issue a lot more important to an individual builder's
> issues than the possibility that there may be a major design change
> at some undetermined time in the future. It may be that there is no
> design change at all, or a big change might be some place other than
> the wings.
>
> I am not saying I am not concerned about the structural failures. I
> only think that the likelihood of a big fix in the near future is
> very small. Also, my concern is large, but the real danger of a
> structural failure in any single 601XL with the current design is
> still very small. It may turn out (much to my frustration) that the
> failures are simply results from overstressing the planes or improper
> cable tensions and if you keep within design limits you will be just fine.
>
> Paul
> XL fuselage
> do not archive
>
>
> At 06:40 AM 5/17/2007, you wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Considering all the talk about wing testing of the 601XL by Zenith,
> > I'm considering putting them aside for now and working on the
> > fuselage. I'm confident that Zenith will rectify any problems if
> > found. That being the case, what problems will I encounter if I
> > build the fuselage first? One problem I see is the center spar. I
> > have one side drilled for the wing root and one side not drilled. If
> > I start building the fuselage around it will I be able to pull it
> > out with out a problem to set the dihedral on the table? Can I build
> > most of the fuselage without the center spar and install the spar at
> > a later time? I just want to keep moving forward and figured now may
> > be a good time to start on the fuselage til we get official word on
> > the wing tests and if there's any corrective actions that need to be taken.
> >
> > --------
> > Andy Shontz
> > CH601XL - Corvair
> > www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113305#113305
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113331#113331
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
cbaron66 wrote:
> I felt the HDS was wimpy enough(relative to RVs), but now there may be potential
for the wings to fall off the XL?
Hasn't the RV-8 shed a few wings?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113332#113332
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
cbaron66 wrote:
> I'm a long time lurker here, but this is my first post on this forum. I've been
considering the 601XL for quite some time, but my only experiance with CH designs
has been repairing a hail damaged HDS. I don't know the PC way to say this
so please forgive my potential faux pas. I felt the HDS was wimpy enough(relative
to RVs), but now there may be potential for the wings to fall off the
XL? Man, this is not making my desicion on what kitplane to buy any simpler. If
you guys feel the need to flame me go ahead.
What did you personally feel was wimpy about the HDS compared to a RV. I stopped
down a local airport over the weekend just to compare. I also felt there was
something anemic about the XL wing I'm building compared to a couple of the planes
I looked at; one of them was an RV. In particular I didn't like the rib
spacing on my XL. It was much wider than anything I saw down at the airport. The
RVs rib spacing was half that if the XL. Granted, the RV has a shorter spar
depth, but when I'm looking at slight oil canning on my lower wing skin, (and
I'm being very careful about my building procedures) it makes me wonder. My top
skin doesn't oil can because the skin has a more pronounced curve, but that
strength is just an illusion in my opinion. The lower skin tells the story there.
Under stress, the top skin would be subject to nearly the same oil-canning
potential as the bottom.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113333#113333
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
No flames - just truth.
This is how things get blown WAY out of proportion. Somebody makes a
statement over and over, whether based on fact or not, and sooner or later
it becomes believable.
I don't recall any crashes where the wings "fell off." Not with the XL, not
with the HD or the HDS. There may be some possibility of the pilot
unintentionally removing the wings in flight, due to over stressing, or
improper attachment, but the wings did not "fall off."
All of the 601's are plenty strong for what they were designed for: a
simple to construct, inexpensive, lightweight A/C that is easy to fly.
If you want to go 180-200 and do aerobatics, then maybe you need a RV
(better check their crash records, too). Of course, you will spend 2-3 times
more $$ and take 3 times longer to build.
Everyone has to consider their own limitations. I chose the HDS because of
the 3 piece wing. My outboard sections are done and I can still lift and
move them by myself. That's important to me.
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cbaron66
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 7:18 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes
I'm a long time lurker here, but this is my first post on this forum. I've
been considering the 601XL for quite some time, but my only experiance with
CH designs has been repairing a hail damaged HDS. I don't know the PC way to
say this so please forgive my potential faux pas. I felt the HDS was wimpy
enough(relative to RVs), but now there may be potential for the wings to
fall off the XL? Man, this is not making my desicion on what kitplane to buy
any simpler. If you guys feel the need to flame me go ahead.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113321#113321
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Andy,
Tail feathers are the same. XL plans have all the latest do-dads for the
fairings and trim, but otherwise are interchangeable.
BTW - ever looked across the dogfight circle and seen the oilcanning on the
wings of a Cessna 170A? HOLY COW!!!
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ashontz
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 7:34 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings
I thought about that too, the fact that a design change (if it occurs) would
also be to the fuselage itself, unlikely though.
I'm very comfortable with my bulding skills at this point so switching to
the fuselage doesn't bother me. I think you learn a lot more building from
plans.
I'm just wondering if I'd be painting myself into a corner if I have to pull
out the center spar temporarily to set the dyhedral and I can't. I see that
as the biggest show stopper to building the fuselage at this point.
Believe me, I've actually entertained the idea of just stopping work all
together on the XL and ordering plans for an HD. Wouldn't take me anywhere
near as long to rebuild. I wouldn't be surprised if the HD uses the same
stabilizer, elevator, and rudder (not saying it does, I don't know) so all
I'd really be shit out of would be the time and a couple hundred dollars
building the right wing.
p.mulwitz(at)worldnet.att wrote:
> The standard build order starts with the rudder and tail parts, then
> goes to wings, and finally fuselage.
>
> I think one important reason for this is education of the
> builder. It is much less expensive in both time and money to make
> mistakes on the simpler and smaller parts. The fuselage is A LOT
> more complicated and difficult to build than the rest of the
> plane. You are less likely to make a huge mistake on the fuselage
> after building the rest of the parts.
>
> I consider this issue a lot more important to an individual builder's
> issues than the possibility that there may be a major design change
> at some undetermined time in the future. It may be that there is no
> design change at all, or a big change might be some place other than
> the wings.
>
> I am not saying I am not concerned about the structural failures. I
> only think that the likelihood of a big fix in the near future is
> very small. Also, my concern is large, but the real danger of a
> structural failure in any single 601XL with the current design is
> still very small. It may turn out (much to my frustration) that the
> failures are simply results from overstressing the planes or improper
> cable tensions and if you keep within design limits you will be just fine.
>
> Paul
> XL fuselage
> do not archive
>
>
> At 06:40 AM 5/17/2007, you wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Considering all the talk about wing testing of the 601XL by Zenith,
> > I'm considering putting them aside for now and working on the
> > fuselage. I'm confident that Zenith will rectify any problems if
> > found. That being the case, what problems will I encounter if I
> > build the fuselage first? One problem I see is the center spar. I
> > have one side drilled for the wing root and one side not drilled. If
> > I start building the fuselage around it will I be able to pull it
> > out with out a problem to set the dihedral on the table? Can I build
> > most of the fuselage without the center spar and install the spar at
> > a later time? I just want to keep moving forward and figured now may
> > be a good time to start on the fuselage til we get official word on
> > the wing tests and if there's any corrective actions that need to be
taken.
> >
> > --------
> > Andy Shontz
> > CH601XL - Corvair
> > www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113305#113305
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113331#113331
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Thanks, I figured they would be interchangable. So worst case, if I switch to an
HD, I'm out like maybe $450 for what I spent to get the right wing to the stage
I'm at, which is pretty far.
gboothe5(at)comcast.net wrote:
> Andy,
>
> Tail feathers are the same. XL plans have all the latest do-dads for the
> fairings and trim, but otherwise are interchangeable.
>
> BTW - ever looked across the dogfight circle and seen the oilcanning on the
> wings of a Cessna 170A? HOLY COW!!!
>
> Gary Boothe
> Cool, CA
> 601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
> Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
>
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113340#113340
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
ashontz wrote:
>
> cbaron66 wrote:
> > I'm a long time lurker here, but this is my first post on this forum. I've
been considering the 601XL for quite some time, but my only experiance with CH
designs has been repairing a hail damaged HDS. I don't know the PC way to say
this so please forgive my potential faux pas. I felt the HDS was wimpy enough(relative
to RVs), but now there may be potential for the wings to fall off the
XL? Man, this is not making my desicion on what kitplane to buy any simpler.
If you guys feel the need to flame me go ahead.
>
>
> What did you personally feel was wimpy about the HDS compared to a RV. I stopped
down a local airport over the weekend just to compare. I also felt there was
something anemic about the XL wing I'm building compared to a couple of the
planes I looked at; one of them was an RV. In particular I didn't like the rib
spacing on my XL. It was much wider than anything I saw down at the airport.
The RVs rib spacing was half that if the XL. Granted, the RV has a shorter spar
depth, but when I'm looking at slight oil canning on my lower wing skin, (and
I'm being very careful about my building procedures) it makes me wonder. My
top skin doesn't oil can because the skin has a more pronounced curve, but that
strength is just an illusion in my opinion. The lower skin tells the story
there. Under stress, the top skin would be subject to nearly the same oil-canning
potential as the bottom.
>
> It was just the feeling that you get when you see someone, and something just
doesn't seem right about them but you can't put your finger on it and then you
hear a month later they're in the hospital battling cancer. Even though you're
not a doctor, you just knew something wasn't right with them.
I guess anemic is as good as any way to describe it. I guess it just seems to me
this plane(601XL) makes a good platform for a engine with less than 100hp and
less than 160lbs installed weight. The problem seems to ME to be this is not
how the airframe is being marketed-at least from my limited point of veiw. In
an interesting side note, have you guys seen/heard, vans is once again redoing
the RV12? apparently he's found it's not as easy as it first appears to design
a one size fits all airplane that meets all the requirements of LSA, is easy
to fly, is comfortable for crosscountry and isn't ugly as sin.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113346#113346
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Landing Lights |
Has anyone built the landing light and taxi light as two separate units in each
wing yet? (To accommodate a wig-wag installation).
What lights did you use? Which lamp holder?
Also there's a slightly different Aeroflash Strobe/Nav unit (Kit No. 156-0049)
than the one ZAC is supplying. It has a white light on the backside. By mounting
this strobe on the wingtips, you don't need the (rather ugly IMHO) rudder tail
light. Does anybody have experience with that strobe? Will it fit on the XL
wingtips?
Thanks,
Hans van Riet
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113350#113350
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders |
Also, there was a 601XL kit at SnF in 05 under construction
in the sheet metal tent supervised by Flight Crafters
that was being assembled by volunteer's .
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Payne
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 3:20 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: New Wing Testing - Amateur Builders
Well, there was that 601HDS they built and flew at SnF in a week with
volunteer labor. I wonder where it is now?
http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/7dw.html
-- Craig
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Selective posting |
[quote="naumuk(at)alltel.net"]Matt-
I only see maybe 30% of the posts I mak on list. Do I have something set
wrong?
do not archive
Bill Naumuk
HDS Fuse/Corvair
Townville, Pa
> [b]
Bill, I see about 600 posts with your name on them.
Did you send more than that?
They seem to be coming through on this end.
Rick
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113355#113355
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
The XL and the RV are apples and oranges. The XL is a light plane and
the RV is not. The typical horsepower use for the
XL is 100 hp and the RV is nearer 150. The time to scratch build an RV
is near 8 years as it was 5 years for my HDS.
This doesn't make the XL less a plane, but it does point out that it
flies slower with greater economy than a RV, costs considerably
less than a RV to build. They're both great aircraft and both have had
wing problems, probably due more to the way they were flown or built.
The question is more of what you feel you want to spend over the long
term in outlay $35K or $75K and can
you afford 7 to 9 gph at $4.50 or do you want to burn 3.5 to 4 gph at
car gas prices occasionally. The emphasis on speed
voids all these arguments and is probably the most costly and wasteful
aspect of decision making. Just think a little ahead of yourself. The
601 series is not compromised by being a light aircraft, but those who
fly and build them can compromise that standard easier than the heavier
aircraft.
Larry McFarland at www.macsmachine.com
do not archive
ashontz wrote:
>
>
> cbaron66 wrote:
>
>> I'm a long time lurker here, but this is my first post on this forum. I've been
considering the 601XL for quite some time, but my only experiance with CH
designs has been repairing a hail damaged HDS. I don't know the PC way to say
this so please forgive my potential faux pas. I felt the HDS was wimpy enough(relative
to RVs), but now there may be potential for the wings to fall off the
XL? Man, this is not making my desicion on what kitplane to buy any simpler.
If you guys feel the need to flame me go ahead.
>>
>
>
> What did you personally feel was wimpy about the HDS compared to a RV. I stopped
down a local airport over the weekend just to compare. I also felt there was
something anemic about the XL wing I'm building compared to a couple of the
planes I looked at; one of them was an RV. In particular I didn't like the rib
spacing on my XL. It was much wider than anything I saw down at the airport.
The RVs rib spacing was half that if the XL. Granted, the RV has a shorter spar
depth, but when I'm looking at slight oil canning on my lower wing skin, (and
I'm being very careful about my building procedures) it makes me wonder. My
top skin doesn't oil can because the skin has a more pronounced curve, but that
strength is just an illusion in my opinion. The lower skin tells the story
there. Under stress, the top skin would be subject to nearly the same oil-canning
potential as the bottom.
>
> --------
> Andy Shontz
> CH601XL - Corvair
> www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113333#113333
>
>
>
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
ANDY, your driving me crazy, you remind me of a movie in which the
fellow gets all self induced hysterical and needs a DAM GOOD SLAP!!
Let the investigation continue, Andy build your wings, you won't see any
changes, in my opinion. Chris will test yet another XL to ease your mind
and the FAA will still undoubtedly leave a fog for concrete answers. The
FAA has not made any recommendations to the designer that I am aware of,
and with some knowledge, they will not make any recommendations in the
closure of the other incidents, so I believe.
It has been unfortunate that several accidents have happened in a short
period, some of which were extremely stupid.
Having a plane fold it's wings and the rear spar fully intact on the
fuselage is the same as the one that entered into the side of the
wielding shop or exploded in mid air. Neither should be considered a
design flaw and unfortunately should be pointed at owner/builder error.
Be careful out their guys. Build your planes as the plans state, don't
make structural modifications without the designers approval.
Fly in conditions you can handle and know the abilities of your plane
and stay within them. In Canada the 601 series is not rated for
aerobatics and therefore cannot do any of them. Can the plane do some,
likely, I have heard of many people trying, many doing and possibly the
rest leaving a legacy for a couple on this list to cry about structural
integrity.
Build your plane and don't make ANDY changes ,fly your plane within it's
limits and you will have a bird that is fun and safe.
For the rest if you want to wait 8 mos to start building by all means
make sure your comfortable, myself I'm getting ready to soon let my only
daughter at the age of 14, use the 601XL to learn how to fly on. Don't
take this statement lightly there is NOTHING more important to me in
this life then my children.
Now lets get back to building and giving Andy a cuff upside the coconut,
(not really but I feel better picturing it).
Mark Townsend Alma, Ontario
Zodiac 601XL C-GOXL, CH701 just started
www.ch601.org / www.ch701.com / www.Osprey2.com
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ashontz
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 11:16 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings
Thanks, I figured they would be interchangable. So worst case, if I
switch to an HD, I'm out like maybe $450 for what I spent to get the
right wing to the stage I'm at, which is pretty far.
gboothe5(at)comcast.net wrote:
> Andy,
>
> Tail feathers are the same. XL plans have all the latest do-dads for
the
> fairings and trim, but otherwise are interchangeable.
>
> BTW - ever looked across the dogfight circle and seen the oilcanning
on the
> wings of a Cessna 170A? HOLY COW!!!
>
> Gary Boothe
> Cool, CA
> 601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
> Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
>
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113340#113340
6:05 PM
6:05 PM
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
-hi list
after reading all the posts on the wing failure, i
have concluded the only options are to not fly the XL,
fly the XL, or wait to see what the problem really is.
as i am still some time away from my first flight, the
only thing i plan to do is not rivet the top skins on
until i have completed the machine and finished my
taxi tests. i am sorta used to seeing cleco's
sticking out anyway. maybe i'll become a duct tape
expert.
i respect both sides of the wing issue, but no one
really knows what the problem is, if any, and what to
do about it at this time. build on and prosper. for
those already flying, be a 3g max pilot.
john butterfield
601XL, corvair
torrance, ca
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Line Length |
If you happen to be ordering something else from surpluscenter.com, like say
a flap actuator, you can add on 100' of 5/32 clear tubing for $3.49. It's
their item number 20-1022.
Dino
On 5/17/07, Scott Thatcher <s_thatcher@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> Dave,
>
> Great idea... I can't believe I never thought about doing it that way.
> The concept would also work for any other lines needed including control
> cables, brakes lines, etc..
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Scott
>
> <<I am not building yet and cannot give you any dimensions. However, I
> have
> done similar fuel line runs on a speed boat using steel braded lines. I
> went
> to Home Depot and purchased a length of cheap clear hose the same
> diameter.
> I ran the hose as needed and cut it to length. I removed the clear hose
> and
> used it as a template, installing the steel braded connectors on the
> workbench. ... Dave Thompson>>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Landing Lights |
Check out GS-Air.com at the link below. They offer an LED based strobe/position
light combo package that does as you described.
Dred
https://ssl.perfora.net/gs-air.com/sess/utn;jsessionid=1543ab024ee6dc8/shopdata/index.shopscript
---- hansriet <hansinla@mac.com> wrote:
>
> Has anyone built the landing light and taxi light as two separate units in each
wing yet? (To accommodate a wig-wag installation).
>
> What lights did you use? Which lamp holder?
>
> Also there's a slightly different Aeroflash Strobe/Nav unit (Kit No. 156-0049)
than the one ZAC is supplying. It has a white light on the backside. By mounting
this strobe on the wingtips, you don't need the (rather ugly IMHO) rudder
tail light. Does anybody have experience with that strobe? Will it fit on the
XL wingtips?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Hans van Riet
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
larry(at)macsmachine.com wrote:
> The XL and the RV are apples and oranges. The XL is a light plane and
> the RV is not. The typical horsepower use for the
> XL is 100 hp and the RV is nearer 150. The time to scratch build an RV
> is near 8 years as it was 5 years for my HDS.
> This doesn't make the XL less a plane, but it does point out that it
> flies slower with greater economy than a RV, costs considerably
> less than a RV to build. They're both great aircraft and both have had
> wing problems, probably due more to the way they were flown or built.
> The question is more of what you feel you want to spend over the long
> term in outlay $35K or $75K and can
> you afford 7 to 9 gph at $4.50 or do you want to burn 3.5 to 4 gph at
> car gas prices occasionally. The emphasis on speed
> voids all these arguments and is probably the most costly and wasteful
> aspect of decision making. Just think a little ahead of yourself. The
> 601 series is not compromised by being a light aircraft, but those who
> fly and build them can compromise that standard easier than the heavier
> aircraft.
>
> Larry McFarland at www.macsmachine.com
> do not archive
>
>
> ashontz wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > cbaron66 wrote:
> >
> > > I'm a long time lurker here, but this is my first post on this forum. I've
been considering the 601XL for quite some time, but my only experiance with
CH designs has been repairing a hail damaged HDS. I don't know the PC way to say
this so please forgive my potential faux pas. I felt the HDS was wimpy enough(relative
to RVs), but now there may be potential for the wings to fall off
the XL? Man, this is not making my desicion on what kitplane to buy any simpler.
If you guys feel the need to flame me go ahead.
> > >
> >
> >
> > What did you personally feel was wimpy about the HDS compared to a RV. I stopped
down a local airport over the weekend just to compare. I also felt there
was something anemic about the XL wing I'm building compared to a couple of
the planes I looked at; one of them was an RV. In particular I didn't like the
rib spacing on my XL. It was much wider than anything I saw down at the airport.
The RVs rib spacing was half that if the XL. Granted, the RV has a shorter
spar depth, but when I'm looking at slight oil canning on my lower wing skin,
(and I'm being very careful about my building procedures) it makes me wonder.
My top skin doesn't oil can because the skin has a more pronounced curve, but
that strength is just an illusion in my opinion. The lower skin tells the story
there. Under stress, the top skin would be subject to nearly the same oil-canning
potential as the bottom.
> >
> > --------
> > Andy Shontz
> > CH601XL - Corvair
> > www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113333#113333
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Umm, You do know what an RV12 is don't you???????????????
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113373#113373
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Nr of 601XLs registered in US was Re: Re: Wing sweep and |
recent crashes
The last time I checked my XL in the FAA data base it did not show as
having an airworthiness cert, although I did receive it about 2 years
ago. Last year, before my first annual conditional inspection, I
received my Repairman's Cert and I asked at the FAA District Office why
it did not show as having an airworthiness cert in the data base. The
answer was something like "we don't know".
Tony Graziano
601XL/Jab3300A; N493TG; 240 hrs.of great flying enjoyment!.
----------
Re: Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes
From: William Dominguez (bill_dom@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu May 17 - 5:35 AM
David Mikesell <skyguynca@skyguynca.com> wrote:I did a FAA
registraition search and it only comes up with 132 601XL's in the USA.
Out
of that only 89 carry a current airworthiness which means the others are
not
flying yet. How and where did you make the search. I'm using this page:
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/acftref_inquiry.asp
and I don't get more than 13.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami, Florida
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
I'll let other comment here. I've heard that for every one person that actually
speaks up that there's a hundred people thinking the same thng. So you get a
hundred and I get a hundred.
zodierocket(at)hsfx.ca wrote:
> ANDY, your driving me crazy, you remind me of a movie in which the
> fellow gets all self induced hysterical and needs a DAM GOOD SLAP!!
>
> Let the investigation continue, Andy build your wings, you won't see any
> changes, in my opinion. Chris will test yet another XL to ease your mind
> and the FAA will still undoubtedly leave a fog for concrete answers. The
> FAA has not made any recommendations to the designer that I am aware of,
> and with some knowledge, they will not make any recommendations in the
> closure of the other incidents, so I believe.
> It has been unfortunate that several accidents have happened in a short
> period, some of which were extremely stupid.
>
> Having a plane fold it's wings and the rear spar fully intact on the
> fuselage is the same as the one that entered into the side of the
> wielding shop or exploded in mid air. Neither should be considered a
> design flaw and unfortunately should be pointed at owner/builder error.
> Be careful out their guys. Build your planes as the plans state, don't
> make structural modifications without the designers approval.
>
> Fly in conditions you can handle and know the abilities of your plane
> and stay within them. In Canada the 601 series is not rated for
> aerobatics and therefore cannot do any of them. Can the plane do some,
> likely, I have heard of many people trying, many doing and possibly the
> rest leaving a legacy for a couple on this list to cry about structural
> integrity.
>
> Build your plane and don't make ANDY changes ,fly your plane within it's
> limits and you will have a bird that is fun and safe.
>
> For the rest if you want to wait 8 mos to start building by all means
> make sure your comfortable, myself I'm getting ready to soon let my only
> daughter at the age of 14, use the 601XL to learn how to fly on. Don't
> take this statement lightly there is NOTHING more important to me in
> this life then my children.
>
> Now lets get back to building and giving Andy a cuff upside the coconut,
> (not really but I feel better picturing it).
>
> Mark Townsend Alma, Ontario
> Zodiac 601XL C-GOXL, CH701 just started
> www.ch601.org / www.ch701.com / www.Osprey2.com
> do not archive
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113376#113376
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
AMEN! This list USED to be entertaining and helpful. I hesitate to even open
it in the last week... :(
do not archive
ANDY, your driving me crazy, you remind me of a movie in which the
fellow gets all self induced hysterical and needs a DAM GOOD SLAP!!
Let the investigation continue, Andy build your wings, you won't see any
changes, in my opinion. Chris will test yet another XL to ease your mind
and the FAA will still undoubtedly leave a fog for concrete answers. The
FAA has not made any recommendations to the designer that I am aware of,
and with some knowledge, they will not make any recommendations in the
closure of the other incidents, so I believe.
It has been unfortunate that several accidents have happened in a short
period, some of which were extremely stupid.
Having a plane fold it's wings and the rear spar fully intact on the
fuselage is the same as the one that entered into the side of the
wielding shop or exploded in mid air. Neither should be considered a
design flaw and unfortunately should be pointed at owner/builder error.
Be careful out their guys. Build your planes as the plans state, don't
make structural modifications without the designers approval.
Fly in conditions you can handle and know the abilities of your plane
and stay within them. In Canada the 601 series is not rated for
aerobatics and therefore cannot do any of them. Can the plane do some,
likely, I have heard of many people trying, many doing and possibly the
rest leaving a legacy for a couple on this list to cry about structural
integrity.
Build your plane and don't make ANDY changes ,fly your plane within it's
limits and you will have a bird that is fun and safe.
For the rest if you want to wait 8 mos to start building by all means
make sure your comfortable, myself I'm getting ready to soon let my only
daughter at the age of 14, use the 601XL to learn how to fly on. Don't
take this statement lightly there is NOTHING more important to me in
this life then my children.
Now lets get back to building and giving Andy a cuff upside the coconut,
(not really but I feel better picturing it).
Mark Townsend Alma, Ontario
Zodiac 601XL C-GOXL, CH701 just started
www.ch601.org / www.ch701.com / www.Osprey2.com
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ashontz
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 11:16 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings
Thanks, I figured they would be interchangable. So worst case, if I
switch to an HD, I'm out like maybe $450 for what I spent to get the
right wing to the stage I'm at, which is pretty far.
gboothe5(at)comcast.net wrote:
> Andy,
>
> Tail feathers are the same. XL plans have all the latest do-dads for
the
> fairings and trim, but otherwise are interchangeable.
>
> BTW - ever looked across the dogfight circle and seen the oilcanning
on the
> wings of a Cessna 170A? HOLY COW!!!
>
> Gary Boothe
> Cool, CA
> 601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
> Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
>
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113340#113340
6:05 PM
6:05 PM
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
John,
This is exactly what I meant in a previous post about things being totally
blown out of proportion. Some people on this list made so many posts about
wing problems that they now have others questioning the integrity!!
I will freely admit that I am not building an XL, nor is my project anywhere
close to being finished, but I am merely pointing out that NO ONE HAS COME
CLOSE TO SHOWING THAT THERE IS ANY PROBLEM AT ALL!!!!
If I was a cynical guy, I would claim that the RV manufacturer had hired
some guys to throw some sand in our eyes....and they did!
Just as with a very popular TV broadcast, THE SPIN SHOULD STOP HERE! (Pun
intended)
After "....reading all the posts..." one should conclude that:
1) No one has presented any evidence that there is a wing problem
2) No one has presented any evidence that "oil canning" is a problem
3) The manufacturer has presented all his test data, and has offered to
repeat the test at his expense, just to remind everyone that he is
comfortable.
4) All preliminary evidence shows that Pilot Error has been the real cause
of all the accidents, or, at least, no evidence has been given that the A/C
design is at fault.
Your final sentence is most appropriate. In other words, fly the plane
within the limits of what's prudent.
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of john
butterfield
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 9:21 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: wings
<jdbutterfield@yahoo.com>
-hi list
after reading all the posts on the wing failure, i
have concluded the only options are to not fly the XL,
fly the XL, or wait to see what the problem really is.
as i am still some time away from my first flight, the
only thing i plan to do is not rivet the top skins on
until i have completed the machine and finished my
taxi tests. i am sorta used to seeing cleco's
sticking out anyway. maybe i'll become a duct tape
expert.
i respect both sides of the wing issue, but no one
really knows what the problem is, if any, and what to
do about it at this time. build on and prosper. for
those already flying, be a 3g max pilot.
john butterfield
601XL, corvair
torrance, ca
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
Message 46
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing sweep and recent crashes |
Hi Bruce,
A lot of us are concerned about the recent history of in-flight
structural failures on 3 CH601XLs. The latest news is that Chris is
looking into this problem and may figure out what is happening.
I have a friend who has been building an RV-9A at about the same pace
as my work on a 601XL. The differences I can see include the solid
rivets vs. pulled rivets, the different aluminum alloy, and the large
engine cost differences. The RV-9A also weighs more than the XL so
it doesn't qualify as LSA. All of these reasons lead me toward the XL.
I think the kit quality is better on the RV-9A. It has all the match
drilling done on a CNC punch, so alignment of parts is straight
forward. The ZAC kit is not so precisely done, so there is more
"Art" in building the XL.
When I chose to build my XL there had not been any structural
failures of note. I don't know what I would do if I were starting a
project today. I don't think the XL is flimsy as you suggested in
your question. It uses heavier skin in a lot of places compared to
earlier models like the HDS. I think it has a bit higher performance
and a bit more stability than the HDS since the fuselage is a foot longer.
Beyond all that, I would say your choice is a tough one because of
the accident statistics building on the XL. If it is a LSA compliant
design you want, you might consider waiting for the RV-12, or you
might just go ahead with an XL.
Good luck,
Paul
XL fuselage
At 07:17 AM 5/17/2007, you wrote:
>
>I'm a long time lurker here, but this is my first post on this
>forum. I've been considering the 601XL for quite some time, but my
>only experiance with CH designs has been repairing a hail damaged
>HDS. I don't know the PC way to say this so please forgive my
>potential faux pas. I felt the HDS was wimpy enough(relative to
>RVs), but now there may be potential for the wings to fall off the
>XL? Man, this is not making my desicion on what kitplane to buy any
>simpler. If you guys feel the need to flame me go ahead.
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113321#113321
>
>
Message 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
admin(at)arachnidrobotics wrote:
> AMEN! This list USED to be entertaining and helpful. I hesitate to even open
it in the last week... :(
>
> do not archive
>
> --
Me too til I starting taking notice of the thread about wing flutter. There's still
plenty of other fun and interesting thread on here.
do not archive
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113386#113386
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Want to Sell your XL ? |
Any of you guys that want to sell your un finished death trap XLs let me know and
I may be interested in purchase. I'll offer a reasonable price for these worthless
piles of metal, even come and get them and haul them away so you can be
safe. Course, as they aren't worth much I won't be able to pay much for them,
but even at a loss you'll still be alive and safe. Wouldn't that be better than
risking untimely demise ? E-mail me off thread and maybe I can help you out
of your predicament, Best regards, Bill of Georgia
-----Original Message-----
From: planejim@bellsouth.net
Sent: Thu, 17 May 2007 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 99.99999%
Congratulations Aaron. I've heard ( unconfirmed ) that percentage wise, more Zenith
aircraft are completed by the original purchaserer than most other homebuilts.
Also, if you haven't done so, I urge you to communicate with an EAA Flight
Advisor before you make that first flight, reguardless of your experience level.
Good luck!!
do not archive
Jim Hoak
----- Original Message ----- From: "Aaron Gustafson" <agustafson@chartermi.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 8:36 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: 99.99999%
>
> N797AT has W&B done (yesterday), airworthiness certification request > packet
sent in, just waiting. Fideling with weatherstrips, placards, > stationary tests
and minor adjustments.
> Almost there. February 1996- now.
>
> Aaron do not archive
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Mark, I'm not trying to piss you off. I like you, you're a good guy and have personally
taken the time to give me help with stuff and I appreciate that. I'm
just wondering (as are others) what if anything is going on. I'd like to continue
working on my plane and look forward to flying it at some point. I just want
to know it truly is safe and doesn't have any anomolies. It makes sense to
me at this point to move onto another area of the plane for the time being. There
may never be anything conclusive or any changes other than the introduction
of the CH601XLHD or something like. You never know. Figure I'll let it slide
for awhile and see what happens. Doesn't mean I need to sit dead in the water.
zodierocket(at)hsfx.ca wrote:
> ANDY, your driving me crazy, you remind me of a movie in which the
> fellow gets all self induced hysterical and needs a DAM GOOD SLAP!!
>
> Let the investigation continue, Andy build your wings, you won't see any
> changes, in my opinion. Chris will test yet another XL to ease your mind
> and the FAA will still undoubtedly leave a fog for concrete answers. The
> FAA has not made any recommendations to the designer that I am aware of,
> and with some knowledge, they will not make any recommendations in the
> closure of the other incidents, so I believe.
> It has been unfortunate that several accidents have happened in a short
> period, some of which were extremely stupid.
>
> Having a plane fold it's wings and the rear spar fully intact on the
> fuselage is the same as the one that entered into the side of the
> wielding shop or exploded in mid air. Neither should be considered a
> design flaw and unfortunately should be pointed at owner/builder error.
> Be careful out their guys. Build your planes as the plans state, don't
> make structural modifications without the designers approval.
>
> Fly in conditions you can handle and know the abilities of your plane
> and stay within them. In Canada the 601 series is not rated for
> aerobatics and therefore cannot do any of them. Can the plane do some,
> likely, I have heard of many people trying, many doing and possibly the
> rest leaving a legacy for a couple on this list to cry about structural
> integrity.
>
> Build your plane and don't make ANDY changes ,fly your plane within it's
> limits and you will have a bird that is fun and safe.
>
> For the rest if you want to wait 8 mos to start building by all means
> make sure your comfortable, myself I'm getting ready to soon let my only
> daughter at the age of 14, use the 601XL to learn how to fly on. Don't
> take this statement lightly there is NOTHING more important to me in
> this life then my children.
>
> Now lets get back to building and giving Andy a cuff upside the coconut,
> (not really but I feel better picturing it).
>
> Mark Townsend Alma, Ontario
> Zodiac 601XL C-GOXL, CH701 just started
> www.ch601.org / www.ch701.com / www.Osprey2.com
> do not archive
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113388#113388
Message 50
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Andy,
There you go, again...
Wing flutter? ONE lister reported wing flutter in a very peculiar
circumstance! That hardly means that wing flutter is a problem, but the more
you bring it up, all of a sudden wings are fluttering off of 601's
everywhere.
To my knowledge, no one ever agreed what caused the wing flutter of the guy
who reported it while flying over a heat plume. It was certainly not agreed
that it was a structural problem with the wing.
You don't work for the RV guys, do you?
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
Me too til I starting taking notice of the thread about wing flutter.
There's still plenty of other fun and interesting thread on here.
do not archive
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113386#113386
Message 51
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Gray, what is a 601HDSTD?
DO NOT ARCHIVE"
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 52
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
I'm with Mark so add another 100.
ashontz wrote:
> I'll let other comment here. I've heard that for every one person that actually
speaks up that there's a hundred people thinking the same thng. So you get
a hundred and I get a hundred.
>
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113400#113400
Message 53
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Allan
Please give me a little more info on what You have to sell.
Larry Mayes
Linlarmayes@aol.com
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 54
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
601 HDS TailDragger. It's my own acronym. Pretty clever, eh?
So now, when you do your searches for wing failures on 601's, you may have
to include 601HDSTD.
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
DO NOT ARCHIVE
_____
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Jeyoung65@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings
Gray, what is a 601HDSTD?
DO NOT ARCHIVE"
_____
See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> .
Message 55
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Andy,
Me too, add another 100, I'll throw in some bird house plans so you
can be 100% safe as you have stated is your desire. You are NOT gonna
climb THAT hill building airplanes that have "Experimental" on the side
in big letters. John
do not archive
<wr.giacona@suddenlink.net>
I'm with Mark so add another 100.
ashontz wrote:
> I'll let other comment here. I've heard that for every one person
that actually speaks up that there's a hundred people thinking the same
thng. So you get a hundred and I get a hundred.
>
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Message 56
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Et moi aussi,
Dred
---- Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>
> I'm with Mark so add another 100.
>
>
> ashontz wrote:
> > I'll let other comment here. I've heard that for every one person that actually
speaks up that there's a hundred people thinking the same thng. So you get
a hundred and I get a hundred.
> >
>
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113400#113400
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 57
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Interesting responses considering I'm not even the one who mentioned wing flutter
or originally posted the accident reports.
As far as working for RV, why would I work for RV AND build a 601XL with a webpage
with posted progress?
Just looking for answers.
As far as the Experimental posting on the side, yup, mine will obviously have that
as well as everyone else's. That being the case, that's exactly what it means,
experimental, yet everyone comes down on me for doing just that, experimenting
with the idea that perhaps the wings aren't as resistant to twist as they
should or could be. When it comes to that, then I'm told to not toy with the
idea (ie. don't experiment). So which is it, not experimental yet with Experimental
on the side or truly experimental? If it's not experimental, then I'd like
to see some more posted data that says that it's totally structurally sound
in all respects up to +6 Gs.
do not archive
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113415#113415
Message 58
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Line Length between Wing Tank and Selector Valve? |
That's a good idea.
I don't have my fuselage sub-kit yet, so I can't go measure it. But I'll just
hold off until I get that far, then I'll use your plastic tube trick.
Thanks!
Patrick
601XL/Corvair
Eagan, MN
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113416#113416
Message 59
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | winpy looking wings, RV vs HDS |
At 10:17 17-05-07, you wrote:
>experiance with CH designs has been repairing a hail damaged HDS. I
>don't know the PC way to say this so please forgive my potential
>faux pas. I felt the HDS was wimpy enough(relative to RVs), but now
>there may be potential for the wings to fall off the XL?
It is tough for us Zenair types when comparisons are made to RV's.
The 601 HDS is a 1200 lb max airplane, with a 160 mph Vne, usually
with 80-100 hp, and a 4 g limit load.
The RV-6, for example, is a 1600 lb max airplane, with a roughly 210
mph Vne, designed for 150-180 hp, and a 6 g limit load.
So, yes, the HDS wing will look light. The HDS's large spar depth
also allows the wing panel weight to be kept down.
Peter Chapman
Toronto, ON
Message 60
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Thank You. My sentiments exactly. Dan.
----- Original Message -----
From: Tom Henderson
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 9:52 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings
AMEN! This list USED to be entertaining and helpful. I hesitate to
even open it in the last week... :(
do not archive
ZodieRocket <zodierocket@hsfx.ca> wrote:
ANDY, your driving me crazy, you remind me of a movie in which the
fellow gets all self induced hysterical and needs a DAM GOOD SLAP!!
Let the investigation continue, Andy build your wings, you won't see
any
changes, in my opinion. Chris will test yet another XL to ease your
mind
and the FAA will still undoubtedly leave a fog for concrete answers.
The
FAA has not made any recommendations to the designer that I am aware
of,
and with some knowledge, they will not make any recommendations in
the
closure of the other incidents, so I believe.
It has been unfortunate that several accidents have happened in a
short
period, some of which were extremely stupid.
Having a plane fold it's wings and the rear spar fully intact on the
fuselage is the same as the one that entered into the side of the
wielding shop or exploded in mid air. Neither should be considered a
design flaw and unfortunately should be pointed at owner/builder
error.
Be careful out their guys. Build your planes as the plans state,
don't
make structural modifications without the designers approval.
Fly in conditions you can handle and know the abilities of your
plane
and stay within them. In Canada the 601 series is not rated for
aerobatics and therefore cannot do any of them. Can the plane do
some,
likely, I have heard of many people trying, many doing and possibly
the
rest leaving a legacy for a couple on this list to cry about
structural
integrity.
Build your plane and don't make ANDY changes ,fly your plane within
it's
limits and you will have a bird that is fun and safe.
For the rest if you want to wait 8 mos to start building by all
means
make sure your comfortable, myself I'm getting ready to soon let my
only
daughter at the age of 14, use the 601XL to learn how to fly on.
Don't
take this statement lightly there is NOTHING more important to me in
this life then my children.
Now lets get back to building and giving Andy a cuff upside the
coconut,
(not really but I feel better picturing it).
Mark Townsend Alma, Ontario
Zodiac 601XL C-GOXL, CH701 just started
www.ch601.org / www.ch701.com / www.Osprey2.com
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ashontz
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 11:16 AM
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings
Thanks, I figured they would be interchangable. So worst case, if I
switch to an HD, I'm out like maybe $450 for what I spent to get the
right wing to the stage I'm at, which is pretty far.
gboothe5(at)comcast.net wrote:
> Andy,
>
> Tail feathers are the same. XL plans have all the latest do-dads
for
the
> fairings and trim, but otherwise are interchangeable.
>
> BTW - ever looked across the dogfight circle and seen the
oilcanning
on the
> wings of a Cessna 170A? HOLY COW!!!
>
> Gary Boothe
> Cool, CA
> 601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
> Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
>
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL -
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
5/16/2007 6:05 PM
Message 61
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Gary,
This is where all the comments about wing flutter might comes from:
"As the airplane flew to the southwest, he saw the wings visibly vibrate, and
observed what he thought were pieces of metal separate from the airplane."
This comes from the NTSB report about the accident in Oakdale California. Apparently,
the guy who was flying over the plant is not the only one who have
experienced wing flutter.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami, Florida
Andy,
There you go, again...
Wing flutter? ONE lister reported wing flutter in a very peculiar
circumstance! That hardly means that wing flutter is a problem, but the more
you bring it up, all of a sudden wings are fluttering off of 601's
everywhere.
To my knowledge, no one ever agreed what caused the wing flutter of the guy
who reported it while flying over a heat plume. It was certainly not agreed
that it was a structural problem with the wing.
You don't work for the RV guys, do you?
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
Me too til I starting taking notice of the thread about wing flutter.
There's still plenty of other fun and interesting thread on here.
do not archive
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113386#113386
Message 62
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Andy,
I've pretty much stayed out of this. It is your airplane and as long as you can
get it by the AW inspector you can do what ever the hell you want to it.
What I have a problem with is you suggesting completely untested and un-engineered
fixes to a problem that probably doesn't exist.
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113423#113423
Message 63
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | The last word . . . I hope. |
Andy,
Maybe it is a good time for you to review your whole project. The HD
is a completely different plane from the XL. They do have
interchangeable tail parts, but even those are a little different -
due to the changes to strengthen the tail to meet the LSA consensus
standard. However, the "Mission" for these planes is quite different.
The HD is designed to have the qualities of a primary trainer. The
XL is designed for cross country flying. There are many differences
in these missions.
Perhaps you should ask yourself why you are building a plane, what
you intend to do with it, and how advanced your pilot skills are. If
your plans involve flying mostly within gliding distance of your
starting point and your pilot skills are more similar to a primary
student than a commercial pilot, then the HD might indeed be a good
choice for you. On the other hand, if you plan to do a considerable
amount of cross country flying and your experience includes lots of
hours and instrument time along with much long distance travel then
the XL would be a lot more appropriate.
Please note that I didn't include any reference to the possible
design issues with the XL. While I am concerned about that, I think
the other points are much more important to choosing which plane to
build. If your only concern is safety and you have trouble sleeping
because there MIGHT be problem that impacts a small percentage of XLs
then I suggest you consider taking up a different hobby. There is NO
WAY to make experimental airplane flying a completely safe
endeavor. While flying your XL will probably still be safer than
driving to the airport to start your flight there will always be
considerable possibility of a fatal accident flying any airplane and
even higher probably of an accident when it is an experimental
airplane built by an amateur rather than a factory built certified plane.
The bottom line is that life is an adventure which always ends in
death. Perhaps Shakespeare said it best in Julius Caesar:
"Cowards die many times before their deaths;
The valiant never taste of death but once."
Good luck with your dilemma,
Paul
XL fuselage
At 07:34 AM 5/17/2007, you wrote:
>Believe me, I've actually entertained the idea of just stopping work
>all together on the XL and ordering plans for an HD. Wouldn't take
>me anywhere near as long to rebuild. I wouldn't be surprised if the
>HD uses the same stabilizer, elevator, and rudder (not saying it
>does, I don't know) so all I'd really be shit out of would be the
>time and a couple hundred dollars building the right wing.
Message 64
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Thank you for clarifying that. I was actually just reading that report.
[quote="bill_dom(at)yahoo.com"]Gary,
This is where all the comments about wing flutter might comes from:
"As the airplane flew to the southwest, he saw the wings visibly vibrate, and
observed what he thought were pieces of metal separate from the airplane."
This comes from the NTSB report about the accident in Oakdale California. Apparently,
the guy who was flying over the plant is not the only one who have
experienced wing flutter.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami, Florida
Gary Boothe wrote:[quote] --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gary Boothe"
Andy,
There you go, again...
Wing flutter? ONE lister reported wing flutter in a very peculiar
circumstance! That hardly means that wing flutter is a problem, but the more
you bring it up, all of a sudden wings are fluttering off of 601's
everywhere.
To my knowledge, no one ever agreed what caused the wing flutter of the guy
who reported it while flying over a heat plume. It was certainly not agreed
that it was a structural problem with the wing.
You don't work for the RV guys, do you?
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
Me too til I starting taking notice of the thread about wing flutter.
There's still plenty of other fun and interesting thread on here.
do not archive
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL -
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113427#113427
Message 65
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
If you are going to quote it quote it all. That witness was 1/2 mile away and also
heard the engine being "revved up" repeatedly.
> One witness, located about 1/2 mile north of the accident site, stated that he
was outside on his break when his attention was drawn toward the direction of
the accident airplane that was flying overhead towards Oakdale airport. The
airplane was about 800 to 1,000 feet above ground level (agl). He stated that
he heard a "very loud" engine and it sounded as if it were being "revved up" repeatedly.
As the airplane flew to the southwest, he saw the wings visibly vibrate,
and observed what he thought were pieces of metal separate from the airplane.
The witness stated that the engine noise momentarily increased in pitch
and volume before the "left wing collapsed and folded rearward against the" fuselage
of the airplane. The nose pitched down and the airplane entered a spin
to the right. The right wing collapsed upward and folded back against the fuselage.
He stated that the airplane impacted the ground in a 45-degree angle, and
exploded on impact. The witness further reported that the wings remained attached
to the airplane, but folded back during the accident sequence. He added
that he did not see any components separate from the airplane prior to impacting
the ground.
>
> Additional witnesses from various locations surrounding the accident site reported
that the airplane flew a wide arc to enter the traffic pattern. The engine
sounded very loud, as if it were alternately being "revved up to full rpm and
then going to idle." The left wing of the airplane collapsed upward, and it
entered a nose down 60-degree spin to the right. The airplane completed one full
revolution before the right wing collapsed upward and folded back. The airplane
then struck the ground.
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113429#113429
Message 66
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Gig, I guess that falls into the Non-Experimental Experimental camp. It was just
a suggestion. What are you afraid of, that someone may actually go ahead and
implement it? Why would you have a problem with that if the plane is in fact
experimental and it's their plane. Or are you uncomfortable with the fact that
someone is implying that there MAY be, not definite, but MAY be something wrong
with the design? If and there was something wrong with the design wouldn't
you want to know about it? I chose Zenith based on NTSB queries a few years back.
Nothing showed up at the time that didn't suggest pilot error. Now for some
reason we're seeing cases that may in fact imply problems with the airframe.
Seeing as how the 601HD and HDS utilize that same building processes and are
built and flow by the same types of people, I'd have to guess that statiscally
the the workmanship on the 601HD and HDSs and 601XLs are all within the same
bellcurve, yet there are at least 4 suspicious 601XL accidents involving airframe
failure where as with the 601HD and HDSs there are none of that category.
Again, these planes are placarded Experimental. Personally, I'd prefer to see
them placarded Certified, meaning, the design is certified and the inspector overlooking
my work felt my work was up to snuff to be considered professional,
so that the combination of heavily tested design coupled with professional workmanship
is Certified which would be the same as building a Cessna 152 from scratch
per A&P workmanship. That would be nice, but that's not the real world.
So the best I can hope for at a reasonable price is Experimental with a truly
tested design. That's all.
Gig Giacona wrote:
> Andy,
>
> I've pretty much stayed out of this. It is your airplane and as long as you can
get it by the AW inspector you can do what ever the hell you want to it.
>
> What I have a problem with is you suggesting completely untested and un-engineered
fixes to a problem that probably doesn't exist.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113430#113430
Message 67
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
When I read that part I assumed prop failure (benefit of the doubt) that shook
the plane apart, yet the report doesn't mention that. The report also states as
probably cause "Failure of wing structure due to unknown causes".
Gig Giacona wrote:
> If you are going to quote it quote it all. That witness was 1/2 mile away and
also heard the engine being "revved up" repeatedly.
>
>
> > One witness, located about 1/2 mile north of the accident site, stated that
he was outside on his break when his attention was drawn toward the direction
of the accident airplane that was flying overhead towards Oakdale airport. The
airplane was about 800 to 1,000 feet above ground level (agl). He stated that
he heard a "very loud" engine and it sounded as if it were being "revved up"
repeatedly. As the airplane flew to the southwest, he saw the wings visibly vibrate,
and observed what he thought were pieces of metal separate from the airplane.
The witness stated that the engine noise momentarily increased in pitch
and volume before the "left wing collapsed and folded rearward against the"
fuselage of the airplane. The nose pitched down and the airplane entered a spin
to the right. The right wing collapsed upward and folded back against the fuselage.
He stated that the airplane impacted the ground in a 45-degree angle,
and exploded on impact. The witness further reported that the wings remained attached
to the airplane, but folded back during the accident sequence. He added
that he did not see any components separate from the airplane prior to impacting
the ground.
> >
> > Additional witnesses from various locations surrounding the accident site reported
that the airplane flew a wide arc to enter the traffic pattern. The engine
sounded very loud, as if it were alternately being "revved up to full rpm
and then going to idle." The left wing of the airplane collapsed upward, and
it entered a nose down 60-degree spin to the right. The airplane completed one
full revolution before the right wing collapsed upward and folded back. The airplane
then struck the ground.
>
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113431#113431
Message 68
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Andy, I have been following every word of this discussion. I
appreciate your willingness to explore the information we have and
search for answers. It is hard to understand those who apparently
would rather not know. Jerry
On May 17, 2007, at 4:13 PM, ashontz wrote:
>
> When I read that part I assumed prop failure (benefit of the doubt)
> that shook the plane apart, yet the report doesn't mention that.
> The report also states as probably cause "Failure of wing structure
> due to unknown causes".
>
>
> Gig Giacona wrote:
>> If you are going to quote it quote it all. That witness was 1/2
>> mile away and also heard the engine being "revved up" repeatedly.
>>
>>
>>> One witness, located about 1/2 mile north of the accident site,
>>> stated that he was outside on his break when his attention was
>>> drawn toward the direction of the accident airplane that was
>>> flying overhead towards Oakdale airport. The airplane was about
>>> 800 to 1,000 feet above ground level (agl). He stated that he
>>> heard a "very loud" engine and it sounded as if it were being
>>> "revved up" repeatedly. As the airplane flew to the southwest, he
>>> saw the wings visibly vibrate, and observed what he thought were
>>> pieces of metal separate from the airplane. The witness stated
>>> that the engine noise momentarily increased in pitch and volume
>>> before the "left wing collapsed and folded rearward against the"
>>> fuselage of the airplane. The nose pitched down and the airplane
>>> entered a spin to the right. The right wing collapsed upward and
>>> folded back against the fuselage. He stated that the airplane
>>> impacted the ground in a 45-degree angle, and exploded on impact.
>>> The witness further reported!
> that the wings remained attached to the airplane, but folded back
> during the accident sequence. He added that he did not see any
> components separate from the airplane prior to impacting the ground.
>>>
>>> Additional witnesses from various locations surrounding the
>>> accident site reported that the airplane flew a wide arc to enter
>>> the traffic pattern. The engine sounded very loud, as if it were
>>> alternately being "revved up to full rpm and then going to idle."
>>> The left wing of the airplane collapsed upward, and it entered a
>>> nose down 60-degree spin to the right. The airplane completed one
>>> full revolution before the right wing collapsed upward and folded
>>> back. The airplane then struck the ground.
>>
>
>
> --------
> Andy Shontz
> CH601XL - Corvair
> www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113431#113431
>
>
Message 69
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Andy,
Pal, you need to get a life! Why do you feel that you MUST rebut every reply to
your "intellectual" posts? And why must you be so adversarial?
I, for one, have had it with your attitude. You have lost totally my ear. "Ashontz"
now means "Delete." Sorry.
Jay in Dallas
"ashontz" <ashontz@nbme.org> wrote:
>
>Gig, I guess that falls into the Non-Experimental Experimental camp. It was just
a suggestion. What are you afraid of, that someone may actually go ahead and
implement it? Why would you have a problem with that if the plane is in fact
experimental and it's their plane. Or are you uncomfortable with the fact that
someone is implying that there MAY be, not definite, but MAY be something wrong
with the design? If and there was something wrong with the design wouldn't
you want to know about it? I chose Zenith based on NTSB queries a few years back.
Nothing showed up at the time that didn't suggest pilot error. Now for some
reason we're seeing cases that may in fact imply problems with the airframe.
Seeing as how the 601HD and HDS utilize that same building processes and are
built and flow by the same types of people, I'd have to guess that statiscally
the the workmanship on the 601HD and HDSs and 601XLs are all within the same
bellcurve, yet there are at least 4 suspicious 601XL!
> accidents involving airframe failure where as with the 601HD and HDSs there
are none of that category. Again, these planes are placarded Experimental. Personally,
I'd prefer to see them placarded Certified, meaning, the design is certified
and the inspector overlooking my work felt my work was up to snuff to
be considered professional, so that the combination of heavily tested design coupled
with professional workmanship is Certified which would be the same as building
a Cessna 152 from scratch per A&P workmanship. That would be nice, but
that's not the real world. So the best I can hope for at a reasonable price is
Experimental with a truly tested design. That's all.
>
>
>Gig Giacona wrote:
>> Andy,
>>
>> I've pretty much stayed out of this. It is your airplane and as long as you
can get it by the AW inspector you can do what ever the hell you want to it.
>>
>> What I have a problem with is you suggesting completely untested and un-engineered
fixes to a problem that probably doesn't exist.
>
>
>--------
>Andy Shontz
>CH601XL - Corvair
>www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113430#113430
>
>
Message 70
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Thanks. I'm not trying to be a hardass. Sport plane building and certification
and all that are plagued enough as it is and I'm definitely not interested in
rocking any boats. I hate the way lawyers et all have totally destroyed GA, plus
now we have she-ite like User Fees and what not breathing down our necks. That
last thing I want is more of the same BS. I'm more than willing to take responsibility
for my own actions, I just want to know I'm working with a truly
sound base, and if not, then just correct it so we can all move on. It would be
nice if even this discussion can be kept to the Zenith flying community as just
a heads up and that's all. It should be treated as a warning in the sense
that "hey you better not drink a fifth a day or you might get cirrohsis" and then
let the individual decide. That's all.
JerryHey wrote:
> Andy, I have been following every word of this discussion. I
> appreciate your willingness to explore the information we have and
> search for answers. It is hard to understand those who apparently
> would rather not know. Jerry
>
>
>
>
> On May 17, 2007, at 4:13 PM, ashontz wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> > When I read that part I assumed prop failure (benefit of the doubt)
> > that shook the plane apart, yet the report doesn't mention that.
> > The report also states as probably cause "Failure of wing structure
> > due to unknown causes".
> >
> >
> > Gig Giacona wrote:
> > > If you are going to quote it quote it all. That witness was 1/2
> > > mile away and also heard the engine being "revved up" repeatedly.
> > >
> > >
> > >> One witness, located about 1/2 mile north of the accident site,
> > >> stated that he was outside on his break when his attention was
> > >> drawn toward the direction of the accident airplane that was
> > >> flying overhead towards Oakdale airport. The airplane was about
> > >> 800 to 1,000 feet above ground level (agl). He stated that he
> > >> heard a "very loud" engine and it sounded as if it were being
> > >> "revved up" repeatedly. As the airplane flew to the southwest, he
> > >> saw the wings visibly vibrate, and observed what he thought were
> > >> pieces of metal separate from the airplane. The witness stated
> > >> that the engine noise momentarily increased in pitch and volume
> > >> before the "left wing collapsed and folded rearward against the"
> > >> fuselage of the airplane. The nose pitched down and the airplane
> > >> entered a spin to the right. The right wing collapsed upward and
> > >> folded back against the fuselage. He stated that the airplane
> > >> impacted the ground in a 45-degree angle, and exploded on impact.
> > >> The witness further reported!
> > that the wings remained attached to the airplane, but folded back
> > during the accident sequence. He added that he did not see any
> > components separate from the airplane prior to impacting the ground.
> > >>
> > >> Additional witnesses from various locations surrounding the
> > >> accident site reported that the airplane flew a wide arc to enter
> > >> the traffic pattern. The engine sounded very loud, as if it were
> > >> alternately being "revved up to full rpm and then going to idle."
> > >> The left wing of the airplane collapsed upward, and it entered a
> > >> nose down 60-degree spin to the right. The airplane completed one
> > >> full revolution before the right wing collapsed upward and folded
> > >> back. The airplane then struck the ground.
> > >
> >
> >
> > --------
> > Andy Shontz
> > CH601XL - Corvair
> > www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113431#113431
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113444#113444
Message 71
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Landing Lights |
> What lights did you use? Which lamp holder?
I'm just using 2 inch (MR-16) 75 watt halogen spot lights, one in each wing.
But this is just for day VFR so 99% of the time they will just be wig-wagged
for visibility. Occasionally I see using them for taxi lights at dusk or
dawn.
www.bulbs.com/eSpec.aspx?RefId=1006&ID=10387
The mounting is just two spring-loaded plates clamping the lamps. The three
long, spring-loaded bolts allow the lamps to be aimed. I borrowed the idea
from Creative Air:
http://www.creativair.com/source/_inst/duckworks_landing_light_install.pdf
I've decided on (almost) no socket at all. The sockets for MR-16 (bi-pin)
are less then impressive. But the lamps will last a long time so I'll just
solder pig-tails to the lamps' pins, encapsulate the pin end of the lamp in
RTV to mechanically support the joints and use an in-line Molex plug/socket
for ease of replacement.
If you really want to see and be seen try these HID lights (yes, they say
they can be wig-wagged). But it will cost you $500-$1000:
www.creativair.com/landing-lights-p-91.html
www.xevision.com
-- Craig
Message 72
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Zenith Zip Fly-in or Drive -in |
Hi Folks, the Zenith Zip fly-in being held in Brampton Ontario will be
held this weekend. For more information on this please go to
www.zenithnorth.com
I am writing to let you all know that I have a couple of openings in the
Rudder workshop being held this weekend at the event. So if you ever
wanted to attend a rudder workshop and meet many Zenith owners this is
the time. Show up early Sat morning and stay for the weekend. For U.S.
residents close to the boarder, many of our attendees are from the U.S.
and find that we are closer. You are welcome to join in the workshop or
just to come for the Fly-in. Getting a rudder back home is simple.
So if your interested let me know at workshop@can-zacaviation.com
Mark Townsend
Can-Zac Aviation Ltd.
president@can-zacaviation.com
www.can-zacaviation.com
6:05 PM
Message 73
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
I'll get concerned when Chris tells his family members to stop flying
the demo 601XL. Until then, I'm going to continue building...
Steve
Steve Look
Monticello, IL
601XL, Corvair
"Dogs have owners, Cats have staff"
Message 74
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | wing baggage fasteners |
hi list
i am completing the wing baggage doors, and the Zues
fasteners i have with the kit do not seem to have a
washer or something to keep the screw on after you
open the door. i seem to remember on the planes i
flew in the marine corp, that the fasteners could be
unscrewd, and would stay on. is there a rubber washer
or some other devise that would keep them attached to
the door or is there a better way to secure the doors
without the likelyhood of losing one or more of the
screws every time i open the door.
john butterfield
601XL, corvair
torrance, ca
Message 75
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 wing strut |
And speaking of 701 struts. Has anyone had trouble with the angle of the
strut pick up on 7F-17 ?
What I mean is, when you put the strut onto 7F-17, the other end of the
strut does not come close to the upper strut fittings 7V2-5 and 7V4-4 ?
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 76
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
ashontz,
this is getting reallll oldd. I have a suggestion. Sell your plane and get
a certified aircraft.
these passive agreesive solilloquies are killing this site. move on man! get over
it, lets build planes PLease!
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Jaybannist@cs.com
>Sent: May 17, 2007 5:07 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings
>
>
>Andy,
>
>Pal, you need to get a life! Why do you feel that you MUST rebut every reply
to your "intellectual" posts? And why must you be so adversarial?
>
>I, for one, have had it with your attitude. You have lost totally my ear. "Ashontz"
now means "Delete." Sorry.
>
>Jay in Dallas
>
>
>"ashontz" <ashontz@nbme.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>Gig, I guess that falls into the Non-Experimental Experimental camp. It was just
a suggestion. What are you afraid of, that someone may actually go ahead and
implement it? Why would you have a problem with that if the plane is in fact
experimental and it's their plane. Or are you uncomfortable with the fact that
someone is implying that there MAY be, not definite, but MAY be something wrong
with the design? If and there was something wrong with the design wouldn't
you want to know about it? I chose Zenith based on NTSB queries a few years
back. Nothing showed up at the time that didn't suggest pilot error. Now for some
reason we're seeing cases that may in fact imply problems with the airframe.
Seeing as how the 601HD and HDS utilize that same building processes and are
built and flow by the same types of people, I'd have to guess that statiscally
the the workmanship on the 601HD and HDSs and 601XLs are all within the same
bellcurve, yet there are at least 4 suspicious 601X
!
> L!
>> accidents involving airframe failure where as with the 601HD and HDSs there
are none of that category. Again, these planes are placarded Experimental. Personally,
I'd prefer to see them placarded Certified, meaning, the design is certified
and the inspector overlooking my work felt my work was up to snuff to
be considered professional, so that the combination of heavily tested design
coupled with professional workmanship is Certified which would be the same as
building a Cessna 152 from scratch per A&P workmanship. That would be nice, but
that's not the real world. So the best I can hope for at a reasonable price
is Experimental with a truly tested design. That's all.
>>
>>
>>Gig Giacona wrote:
>>> Andy,
>>>
>>> I've pretty much stayed out of this. It is your airplane and as long as you
can get it by the AW inspector you can do what ever the hell you want to it.
>>>
>>> What I have a problem with is you suggesting completely untested and un-engineered
fixes to a problem that probably doesn't exist.
>>
>>
>>--------
>>Andy Shontz
>>CH601XL - Corvair
>>www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Read this topic online here:
>>
>>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113430#113430
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 77
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | wing baggage fasteners |
John
Someone posted an idea for this awhile back that seemed to work pretty good.
It involved making some plastic washers to push on to the Duzs fasteners.
Get a plastic milk carton or similar. I used some oil bottles. Find a piece
of tubing around 3/4 diameter. I had a piece of copper laying around. It
worked but had to be dressed up every 3 or 4 punches. I used the belt sander
to sharpen the end, then punched out several disks of the plastic bottle.
Find a piece of steel at least 1/8" thick that you can drill a 1/4" hole
into. Center the disk over the hole and use a 1/4" drift punch to punch the
center hole into the disk. Or just use a paper punch. They will be a bit
tight to install, but you won't have to worry about them falling out
anymore.
Randy Stout
San Antonio TX
www.geocities.com/r5t0ut21
n282rs at satx.rr.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of john
butterfield
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 5:31 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: wing baggage fasteners
--> <jdbutterfield@yahoo.com>
hi list
i am completing the wing baggage doors, and the Zues
fasteners i have with the kit do not seem to have a
washer or something to keep the screw on after you
open the door. i seem to remember on the planes i
flew in the marine corp, that the fasteners could be
unscrewd, and would stay on. is there a rubber washer
or some other devise that would keep them attached to
the door or is there a better way to secure the doors
without the likelyhood of losing one or more of the
screws every time i open the door.
john butterfield
601XL, corvair
torrance, ca
Message 78
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: wing baggage fasteners |
HI john,
This was asked in an earlyer post and I answered with what I did. You can use
Dzus clips from ACS, but if the holes are a little large they will not work.
I made my holes a little bigger and used a small "O" ring in the groove of the
Dzus fastener. It has been working great for 2 1/2 years and over 300 Hrs.
Al from Oshkosh (HDS)
----- Original Message ----
From: john butterfield <jdbutterfield@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 6:31:00 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: wing baggage fasteners
hi list
i am completing the wing baggage doors, and the Zues
fasteners i have with the kit do not seem to have a
washer or something to keep the screw on after you
open the door. i seem to remember on the planes i
flew in the marine corp, that the fasteners could be
unscrewd, and would stay on. is there a rubber washer
or some other devise that would keep them attached to
the door or is there a better way to secure the doors
without the likelyhood of losing one or more of the
screws every time i open the door.
john butterfield
601XL, corvair
torrance, ca
Message 79
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | wing baggage fasteners |
O'rings.
Gary Boothe
Cool, CA
601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 90% done,
Tail done, wings done, working on c-section
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of john
butterfield
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 4:31 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: wing baggage fasteners
<jdbutterfield@yahoo.com>
hi list
i am completing the wing baggage doors, and the Zues
fasteners i have with the kit do not seem to have a
washer or something to keep the screw on after you
open the door. i seem to remember on the planes i
flew in the marine corp, that the fasteners could be
unscrewd, and would stay on. is there a rubber washer
or some other devise that would keep them attached to
the door or is there a better way to secure the doors
without the likelyhood of losing one or more of the
screws every time i open the door.
john butterfield
601XL, corvair
torrance, ca
Message 80
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: wing baggage fasteners |
John,
The parts you need are called Type GP thermoplastic half grommets.
Available at Aircraft Spruce as GP-4B for .25 diameter Dzus studs or
GP-5B for .31 diameter Dzus Studs
and they are all of 13 cents for the 4B and 6 cents for the 5B. I
understand that milk carton cutouts would do the same
thing, but these probably look better and don't cost much.
Larry McFarland at www.macsmachine.com
john butterfield wrote:
>
> hi list
> i am completing the wing baggage doors, and the Zues
> fasteners i have with the kit do not seem to have a
> washer or something to keep the screw on after you
> open the door. i seem to remember on the planes i
> flew in the marine corp, that the fasteners could be
> unscrewd, and would stay on. is there a rubber washer
> or some other devise that would keep them attached to
> the door or is there a better way to secure the doors
> without the likelyhood of losing one or more of the
> screws every time i open the door.
> john butterfield
> 601XL, corvair
> torrance, ca
>
>
>
Message 81
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
You mean that 601XL with 1200 hours on it, that most of us have had our
butts into?
Mark
Oh and CATS are only good for Chinese food.
I keep looking at my two, and the wife keeps saying no! Maybe I'll throw
one in the cage with the Ferrets and see who wins.
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
I'll get concerned when Chris tells his family members to stop flying
the demo 601XL. Until then, I'm going to continue building...
Steve
Steve Look
Monticello, IL
601XL, Corvair
"Dogs have owners, Cats have staff"
6:05 PM
Message 82
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Dynon installation |
Bob-
My point exactly. I left in 1968 when Grumman and aviation were the
hub of the universe. Everyone's moms and dads were either engineers or
highly skilled tradespeople. Aviation legends were walking the street.
Alan Shepard and Rusty Schweickart both were over to our house. Fred
Herman (One of the test astronauts who figured out how to fix the
filtration system on Apollo 13) was the guy who supervised (Suffered
through) my first take-off at the age of 12. Cripes, Republic was
cranking out the F-104 and F-105 where you learned to fly when I was
there!!
When my brother and I were back in 1999, all that was left of
Grumman was a piece of Plant 1 on South Oyster Bay Road, which was being
used as a library for the company history. Republic had been downgraded
to a GA field.
You had to be there in the glory days. Don't blame you for not
missing the down times. Once again, I could cry.
P.S. Have flight pictures of Block Island from a C-172A.
do not archive
Bill Naumuk
HDS Fuse/Corvair
Townville, Pa
----- Original Message -----
From: NYTerminat@aol.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: RE: Dynon installation
Bill,
I was born and raised in Farmingdale, my mom used to work for Grumman
making wiring harnesses for the F-14. I left L.I. in 2000 and moved to
Marathon,NY and I don't miss L.I. one bit. Got my flight training at
Republic Airport, when I was able to solo, I used to go out to Block
Island for those $100.00 hamburgers. My In-Laws used to live in
Bethpage.
Bob Spudis
do not archive
In a message dated 5/16/2007 6:46:52 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
naumuk@alltel.net writes:
Brian-
Small world. I was born and raised in Bethpage, and my father
was a managing engineer for the landing gear division of Grumman. Sad
what's happened to one of the great aviation think tanks in world
history.
One of my employees was Gabby Gabrewski's nephew, and I had no
idea Gabby moved a couple of blocks away from where I grew up once
Republic bit the dust and he went to Grumman.
I could cry.
Bill Naumuk
HDS Fuse/Corvair
Townville, Pa
----- Original Message -----
From: RURUNY@aol.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 10:12 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: RE: Dynon installation
>but when you attach the 37-pin D-sub connector
>and room to curl the wiring, it requires around 10".Also don't forget
the tubing for pitot, AOA, and static. It might or might notbe an issue
see pic at http://www.701builder.com/electrical10.htm go downto the 9th
pic on this page.Brian UnruhLong Island, NYwww.701builder.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
See what's free at AOL.com.
Message 83
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Members,
Who can tell me what the tire pressure is supposed to be on the
ZodiacXL with tri-gear.
Tracy Stone
Message 84
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Point well taken Gig, specially because the witness seems to change the story slightly.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601 XL
Miami, Florida
If you are going to quote it quote it all. That witness was 1/2 mile away and
also heard the engine being "revved up" repeatedly.
> One witness, located about 1/2 mile north of the accident site, stated that
he was outside on his break when his attention was drawn toward the direction
of the accident airplane that was flying overhead towards Oakdale airport.
The airplane was about 800 to 1,000 feet above ground level (agl). He stated
that he heard a "very loud" engine and it sounded as if it were being "revved
up" repeatedly. As the airplane flew to the southwest, he saw the wings visibly
vibrate, and observed what he thought were pieces of metal separate from
the airplane. The witness stated that the engine noise momentarily increased
in pitch and volume before the "left wing collapsed and folded rearward against
the" fuselage of the airplane. The nose pitched down and the airplane entered
a spin to the right. The right wing collapsed upward and folded back against
the fuselage. He stated that the airplane impacted the ground in a 45-degree
angle, and exploded on impact. The witness
further reported t!
hat the wings remained attached to the airplane, but folded back during the accident
sequence. He added that he did not see any components separate from the
airplane prior to impacting the ground.
>
> Additional witnesses from various locations surrounding the accident site reported
that the airplane flew a wide arc to enter the traffic pattern. The engine
sounded very loud, as if it were alternately being "revved up to full rpm
and then going to idle." The left wing of the airplane collapsed upward, and
it entered a nose down 60-degree spin to the right. The airplane completed
one full revolution before the right wing collapsed upward and folded back.
The airplane then struck the ground.
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113429#113429
Message 85
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Rudder cables exiting rear fuslage |
After trying numerous search criteria I was unable to locate any earlier concerns
about the description, location, drilling, cutting or general construction
of the exit holes and fairlead measurements, (other than the P-poor drawings on
6-B-4)... that leave a great deal to the imagination.
These exit holes (slots) should be smooth and nearly frictionless for cable drag
and wear, but some Aviation engineer decided to just "spot them" and leave the
rest up to us poor B---turds to figure it out.
I did find another builders pictures on his web site that show his best guess...
but no narrative and no measurements... so ? has anybody concerned themselves
with a "smooth, sanitary, clean install" or are we just "Winging It?"
Love and kisses...
help!
Thanks,
Mike
--------
Mike Miller @ millrml@aol.com
601 XL, 3300, Dynon
Remember, "the second mouse gets the cheese"!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113507#113507
Message 86
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Landing Lights |
Hans,
I am using the AeroFlash Nav-Strobe-Position Lights and plan on mounting them about
150mm behind the wing spar. I hope to make the wingtip out of one piece
of flat metal with a localized bubble to mount the light. I just need to figure
out what angle to make the bubble face so the light is at the correct position
to give full coverage.
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
Corvair Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113508#113508
Message 87
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
Andy,
I noticed you mentioned you only drilled one side of the center spar. I set the
dihedral of both wing spars and the center spar before I began the wing assembly.
Did I make a mistake here? Should I have waited to drill one end till
later? Why?
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
Corvair Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113511#113511
Message 88
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
50lbs.
George May
601XL 912s---74 hours
>From: "robert stone" <rstone4@hot.rr.com>
>To: "Zenith list" <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Zenith-List: Tire Pressure
>Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 21:03:08 -0500
>
>Members,
> Who can tell me what the tire pressure is supposed to be on the
>ZodiacXL with tri-gear.
>
>Tracy Stone
_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazines 2007 editors choice for best Web mailaward-winning Windows
Live Hotmail.
Message 89
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder cables exiting rear fuslage |
Hi Mike,
I'm sorry but I am confused over your question. Just what is it
about the rudder cable exits that you are concerned about?
I just made the fair-leads according to the plans and riveted them in
place. Am I missing something here?
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive
At 07:11 PM 5/17/2007, you wrote:
>
>After trying numerous search criteria I was unable to locate any
>earlier concerns about the description, location, drilling, cutting
>or general construction of the exit holes and fairlead measurements,
>(other than the P-poor drawings on 6-B-4)... that leave a great deal
>to the imagination.
>
>These exit holes (slots) should be smooth and nearly frictionless
>for cable drag and wear, but some Aviation engineer decided to just
>"spot them" and leave the rest up to us poor B---turds to figure it out.
>
>I did find another builders pictures on his web site that show his
>best guess... but no narrative and no measurements... so ? has
>anybody concerned themselves with a "smooth, sanitary, clean
>install" or are we just "Winging It?"
>
>Love and kisses...
>
>help!
>
>Thanks,
>Mike
>
>--------
>Mike Miller @ millrml@aol.com
>601 XL, 3300, Dynon
>
>Remember, "the second mouse gets the cheese"!
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113507#113507
>
>
Message 90
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings |
If youre a plans builder then you would need to install both spars in
the center spar, run a string and do the math to ensure that both spars
are equally set and proper. Their may be other ways but I can't think of
one that would guarantee accuracy for the plans builder. Then you are
safe to move on and make each wing, knowing that your center spar is
correct and ready for installation into the fuselage.
Mark Townsend
Can-Zac Aviation Ltd.
president@can-zacaviation.com
www.can-zacaviation.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Lendon
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 10:37 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: 601XL Fuselage build before wings
Andy,
I noticed you mentioned you only drilled one side of the center spar. I
set the dihedral of both wing spars and the center spar before I began
the wing assembly. Did I make a mistake here? Should I have waited to
drill one end till later? Why?
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
Corvair Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=113511#113511
6:05 PM
6:05 PM
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|