Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:06 AM - Prop for 601 XL (Peter W Johnson)
2. 03:40 AM - Re: Who made the parts (MacDonald Doug)
3. 03:47 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (steveadams)
4. 06:08 AM - Drag Spar attach. (steve)
5. 06:20 AM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (William Dominguez)
6. 06:49 AM - Re: Drag Spar attach. (Southern Reflections)
7. 06:49 AM - Re: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure (Gig Giacona)
8. 07:06 AM - Drag Spar attach. (Beckman, Rick)
9. 07:21 AM - Re: Who made the parts (MHerder)
10. 07:23 AM - Re: Who made the parts (MHerder)
11. 07:45 AM - Re: Drag Spar attach. (steve)
12. 07:51 AM - Re: Re: Who made the parts (Frank Roskind)
13. 08:04 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (n85ae)
14. 08:08 AM - Re: Re: Who made the parts (Jeyoung65@aol.com)
15. 08:16 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (thesumak@aol.com)
16. 08:25 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (MHerder)
17. 08:50 AM - Smoking Gun? (Paul Mulwitz)
18. 09:21 AM - Re: Empty weight (T. Graziano)
19. 09:27 AM - Re: Who made the partsWho made the parts (Jim McBurney)
20. 09:35 AM - Re: Smoking Gun? (Jeyoung65@aol.com)
21. 09:54 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (PLAV8R -)
22. 10:10 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (PLAV8R -)
23. 10:10 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (PLAV8R -)
24. 10:32 AM - Re: Who made the parts (PLAV8R -)
25. 10:46 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (PLAV8R -)
26. 11:11 AM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (Bob Sturgis)
27. 11:13 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (n85ae)
28. 11:20 AM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
29. 11:24 AM - Re: Smoking Gun? (Kevin Bonds)
30. 11:44 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (cookwithgas)
31. 12:18 PM - Re: Empty weight (Chuck & Lana Maggart)
32. 12:25 PM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (Beckman, Rick)
33. 12:27 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (John Bolding)
34. 12:33 PM - Re: Who made the parts (Gig Giacona)
35. 12:40 PM - Re: Who made the parts (PLAV8R)
36. 12:43 PM - Re: Empty weight (cookwithgas)
37. 12:44 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (japhillipsga@aol.com)
38. 12:52 PM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (PLAV8R)
39. 12:53 PM - Re: Who made the parts (MHerder)
40. 12:55 PM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (PLAV8R)
41. 12:58 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (Jerry Hey)
42. 01:04 PM - Re: Who made the parts (PLAV8R)
43. 01:06 PM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (PLAV8R)
44. 01:08 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (David Downey)
45. 01:13 PM - Re: Drag Spar attach. (japhillipsga@aol.com)
46. 01:35 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (Bruce Johnson)
47. 01:38 PM - Re: Re: Empty weight (Juan Vega)
48. 01:38 PM - O&O Special (John Bolding)
49. 01:38 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (Frank Roskind)
50. 01:42 PM - Re: Who made the parts (MHerder)
51. 01:43 PM - Re: Re: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure (japhillipsga@aol.com)
52. 01:47 PM - Re: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure (ashontz)
53. 01:55 PM - Re: I must say................... (ashontz)
54. 01:56 PM - Re: Empty weight (steve)
55. 01:58 PM - Re: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure (swater6)
56. 02:01 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (george may)
57. 02:20 PM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (PLAV8R)
58. 02:22 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (Jaybannist@cs.com)
59. 02:45 PM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (ashontz)
60. 02:46 PM - As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (ashontz)
61. 03:36 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (James E. Lanier)
62. 04:00 PM - Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (ashontz)
63. 04:12 PM - Re: Who made the parts (Bob Sturgis)
64. 04:18 PM - Re: Who made the partsWho made the parts (Bob Sturgis)
65. 04:24 PM - Flying Music (Tim Verthein)
66. 04:27 PM - Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (dfmoeller)
67. 06:06 PM - New Project Problems (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
68. 06:21 PM - Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (ashontz)
69. 06:42 PM - Re: Who made the parts (Bob Sturgis)
70. 06:44 PM - Re: New Project Problems (Bob Sturgis)
71. 07:09 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (William Dominguez)
72. 07:22 PM - Re: Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (William Dominguez)
73. 08:46 PM - Re: New Project Problems (MHerder)
74. 08:56 PM - Re: Va Defined (Jimbo)
75. 09:22 PM - Re: Va Defined (n801bh@netzero.com)
76. 09:22 PM - Re: Re: New Project Problems (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
77. 10:39 PM - Re: Re: New Project Problems (Craig Payne)
78. 11:47 PM - Re: Who made the parts (James E. Lanier)
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 |
|
Hi Guys/Gals,
Anybody using an O-200 on a 601 XL?
What size/type of prop are you using?
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
Checked by AVG.
6:32 PM
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: | Re: Who made the parts |
Bob, I've been to the factory and seen them building
kit components with my own eyes. If you have such
concerns, a trip to Mexico, MO might be in order.
Doug MacDonald
CH-701 Scratch Builder
NW Ontario
DO NOT ARCHIVE
--- Bob Sturgis <bobefx@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I understand that they subconrtact the kits out. I
> have been told that no kit is actuley made by Zenith
> or Zenair, it's all done outside of north America.
> Bobefx
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 12:13:49 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Who made the parts
>
> <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
>
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:05:29AM -0700, Bob
> Sturgis wrote:
> > AMD does not build from scratch or do they.
>
> AMD builds from kits supplied by Zenair in Canada.
> --
> Jay Maynard, K5ZC
> http://www.conmicro.com
> http://jmaynard.livejournal.com
> http://www.tronguy.net
> Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes,
> that's me!)
> AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March,
> delivery 2 June)
>
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
The problem as stated above is determining the sequence. Every structure has it's
weakest llinks, and once overstressed it will fail in those areas regardless
of the initial cause of the failure. Once the wing starts to go, it will subsequently
overstress and fail at its' weakest points until it leaves the aircraft
or is in a position in which it is no longer being stresed. Just saying "wow,
look at the failure at x" tells you little unless you can determine the sequence.
I wish I had an answer, because whether or not you fly an xl, just imagining
that happening to any aircraft sends a chill down my spine.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179110#179110
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: | Drag Spar attach. |
Now that the drag spar is a topic I need to ask this:
Those of you who have installed your wings, how difficult was it to get
the bolt into the drag spar hole ?
Did you need to apply rearward pressure at the wing tip to align the
holes??
My install was a pain in the butt.
So, I just wonder if you had the same problem.
I also noted that there's a rivet that keeps the left drag spar attach
plates from mating flush with each other. Today I plan on removing that
rivet to make sure there is no stress.
This rivet is the very last inboard rivet in the wing at
6W7-2.....
And this is a QBK......
Steve
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Can you tell us which of the incidents was the one seen in radar with the behavior
you describe?
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami Florida
http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom
---------------------------------
From: Afterfxllc@aol.com
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link
I think that is a bit unfair... We don't see the details of other planes crashes
so we don't know if the wings were on them or not at the time of impact.
I know Van's had to retest their wing design because of some wing issues and
the test showed the wings were engineered correctly. Just as Zenith has done.
I have it on good authority that one of the 601's was seen on radar ascending
and descending 3 to 400 feet just before break up so what does that tell us? The
NTSB has no obligation to report or even examine a experimental crash so we
get less than great information. Someone from the EAA should get together a team
together and study crashes if no one else is doing it to our satisfaction.
This was my point from an earlier posting that no one commented on. I counted
about 240 registered XL's in the US. 4 structural failures equals 1.7%. That
seems quite high to me. I also looked at the NTSB records for the top LSA's
on the market and found zero structural failures and very few fatalities. Planes
just don't break up at that rate.
---------------------------------
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL
Autos.
arget=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---------------------------------
Back to work after baby how do you know when youre ready?
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: Drag Spar attach. |
I drilled out 4 rivets and open the skin up,tighten,and closed the
skin,wanted to be sure it was tight. ,very hard to get to that drag
spar has always bothered me....Joe N101HD 601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: steve
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:05 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Drag Spar attach.
Now that the drag spar is a topic I need to ask this:
Those of you who have installed your wings, how difficult was it to
get the bolt into the drag spar hole ?
Did you need to apply rearward pressure at the wing tip to align the
holes??
My install was a pain in the butt.
So, I just wonder if you had the same problem.
I also noted that there's a rivet that keeps the left drag spar attach
plates from mating flush with each other. Today I plan on removing that
rivet to make sure there is no stress.
This rivet is the very last inboard rivet in the wing at
6W7-2.....
And this is a QBK......
Steve
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: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure |
The notice I received was for the elevator hinge not the flap hinge. Can someone
confirm if the flap hinge was also covered by the notice?
JAPhillipsGA(at)aol.com wrote:
> When I was building my XL in 2004 & 5 ZAC sent out flap hinges in the kits with
aluminum pins instead of steel pins. They contacted us (me) and replaced the
pins for free. Could it be that the XLs with aileron hinges instead of the sheet
metal bend attachment has these aluminum pins ? If so they might be failing
? Just a thought. Best regards, Bill
--------
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=179125#179125
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: | Drag Spar attach. |
List...I have been following the threads about the wing
thing, and to answer your Q about the bolt, this is what I did.
I matched my wing roots to the fuselage and
trimmed the wing skins to give about a quarter of an inch gap between
the skin and the fuselage. On the bottom, just ahead of the rear attach
point, I ground a little extra off the skin to allow me to slip the bolt
in so it is in there front to rear. I have room to get a wrench on the
bolt and tighten the nut from the outside using the torque wrench to
make sure tension is correct. I believe the rubber seal on the wing skin
edge will cover the opening for the wrench, and if it doesn't, make a
fairing out of fiberglass and cover all the little areas of relief for
access.
Just my $0.02.
Rick Beckman
Midwest
Mudworks (for sure with all this rain!)
729 MSL and
sinking
Zodie XL
52EB
www.sharbo.us/thebird
Do not archive, please!
________________________________
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of steve
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 8:05 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Drag Spar attach.
Now that the drag spar is a topic I need to ask this:
Those of you who have installed your wings, how difficult was it to get
the bolt into the drag spar hole ?
Did you need to apply rearward pressure at the wing tip to align the
holes??
My install was a pain in the butt.
So, I just wonder if you had the same problem.
I also noted that there's a rivet that keeps the left drag spar attach
plates from mating flush with each other. Today I plan on removing that
rivet to make sure there is no stress.
This rivet is the very last inboard rivet in the wing at
6W7-2.....
And this is a QBK......
Steve
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: Who made the parts |
PLAV8R - wrote:
> My question is, is it possible that AMD may have received excess inventory (fuselage,
wings, etc) from Czech Aircraft Works when Zodiac broke the affiliation?
You have read my mind, but this only explains the AMD and Czech incident then.
There are still at least two more, one with an inexperienced pilot entering IMC
which is more easily dismissed as pilot error.
Chris's recent letter eludes to possible usage of substandard materials by Czech
and the excess inventory being passed on to AMD would be a possibility but this
is all speculation.
I am interested in finding out more about how the rear spar failed, but as it has
already been stated the sequence of failures is critical. Looking at a broken
(main) wing spar can only tell you that the forces upon impact were great
enough to break a spar which is not surprising. It could also tell you that the
forces subsequent to the initial failure applied loads in such a way that that
the forces were sufficient to break a spar, which is also not suprising in
the least. i.e. rear spar attach fails, then you pretty have a very large surface
area with a very large moment arm free to rotate in just about any direction
that is exposed to 140mph wind. To me this is one of the more plausible theories.
I would like to see Zenith and the NTSB rule out as many failure scenarios as possible
and provide calculations and assumptions made as a basis for these calculations,
but then again I have never asked for them so it is not to say that
they are not available.
--------
One Rivet at a Time!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179130#179130
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: Who made the parts |
PLAV8R - wrote:
> My question is, is it possible that AMD may have received excess inventory (fuselage,
wings, etc) from Czech Aircraft Works when Zodiac broke the affiliation?
Don,
This is a very good question, you have read my mind. Chris's recent letter eludes
to faulty materials being a POSSIBILITY. If this is in fact the case, that
MIGHT be a cause for both the Czech and AMD aircraft, but this still leaves us
with 1 unexplained incident and one other with probable cause (flight into IMC
by inexperienced pilot).
As several have stated the sequence of failure must be determined. Simply looking
at a broken spar will tell you nothing other than "the forces upon impact were
severe enough to break a wing spar" or "that the forces subsequent to the
initial failure were sufficient to break the wing spar" which is not surprising
in the least.
Several have hypothesized that the rear spar attachment is the weak link, but it
MUST be the first point of failure for this to be the case.
IF there is anything wrong with the structure that needs to be fixed I would hope
that it would be the rear spar connection since that would probably be one
of the easiest scenarios to fix.
Others have hypothesized that control surface flutter has lead to these incidents.
I would have to say that even though I am not an expert in the field, I do have
at minimum a basic understanding of structures and neither of these hypothesis
are unfathomable.
If there isn't a design flaw it may be a simple maintenance issue and specific
area to check for fatigue more frequently (ie rear spar attach).
If there is a design flaw, I believe that it will be relatively simple to correct.
But more importantly I believe that the folks at Zenith are upstanding folks
who will do the right thing. They want to know too. I also believe that
if it weren't for these incidents, the XL would probably be a top seller if not
the top seller in the light sport market (I LOVE THE DESIGN and PERFORMANCE
and ECONOMY), so there is no doubt that it is hurting them in my mind. If there
is any one thing that I would like for Zenith and the NTSB to do, it would
be to release more accident photos and to rule out as many failure scenarios
as possible. In ruling out the possible failure scenarios, I would also like
to see some of the calculations and assumptions that were made in ruling out a
failure mode.
1 thing that we know with certainty is that there have been wing failures.
To me this only leaves 3 possible scenarios:
1) Pilot error (not impossible but improbable for ALL 4 incidents). Why have these
pilot errors not shown up in the similar HD and HDS models. Meaning the
aircraft was stressed beyond limits?
2) Design flaw (structure not adequate to resist forces using the materials specified
as designed)
3) Substandard Material/Workmanship Substandard/Maintenance (Anything that isn't
a design flaw or pilot error)
4) Did I miss anything?[/b]
--------
One Rivet at a Time!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179131#179131
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: Drag Spar attach. |
In my case, there isnt a wing skin to fuselage problem. Without the
rubber moulding installed it was still hard to get the drag spar bolt
hole to line up. With the rubber installed it was about the same
difficulty..
I also am thinking of making the access hole under the wing just a
little bit bigger. That would make maintenance and inspection much
easier....
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: Southern Reflections
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Drag Spar attach.
I drilled out 4 rivets and open the skin up,tighten,and closed the
skin,wanted to be sure it was tight. ,very hard to get to that drag
spar has always bothered me....Joe N101HD 601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: steve
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:05 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Drag Spar attach.
Now that the drag spar is a topic I need to ask this:
Those of you who have installed your wings, how difficult was it to
get the bolt into the drag spar hole ?
Did you need to apply rearward pressure at the wing tip to align the
holes??
My install was a pain in the butt.
So, I just wonder if you had the same problem.
I also noted that there's a rivet that keeps the left drag spar
attach plates from mating flush with each other. Today I plan on
removing that rivet to make sure there is no stress.
This rivet is the very last inboard rivet in the wing at
6W7-2.....
And this is a QBK......
Steve
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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: | Re: Who made the parts |
I threw out a hypothesis that the crack might initiate on the upper surface
of the main spar in response to landing forces, because a significant desi
gn change between the HD and the XL was the landing gear. I know the 2000
and the 640 also hace the spring gear, but there might be some difference.
Perhaps the gear is stiffer relative to actual flying weight, so a landing
with a light airplane might cause a very brief, very high apparent acceler
ation of the wing relative to the fuselage, with a lot of torque compared t
o the HD landing gear. This is analogous to how the top surface of rails c
racks in response to heavy loads imposed downward, which one might be given
to believe would crack the base of rails, but the far more common cracks i
nitiate on the top surface.> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Who made the parts>
From: michaelherder@beckgroup.com> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:20:00 -0700> T
" <michaelherder@beckgroup.com>> > > PLAV8R - wrote:> > My question is, is
it possible that AMD may have received excess inventory (fuselage, wings, e
tc) from Czech Aircraft Works when Zodiac broke the affiliation?> > > Don,>
> This is a very good question, you have read my mind. Chris's recent lett
er eludes to faulty materials being a POSSIBILITY. If this is in fact the c
ase, that MIGHT be a cause for both the Czech and AMD aircraft, but this st
ill leaves us with 1 unexplained incident and one other with probable cause
(flight into IMC by inexperienced pilot). > > As several have stated the s
equence of failure must be determined. Simply looking at a broken spar will
tell you nothing other than "the forces upon impact were severe enough to
break a wing spar" or "that the forces subsequent to the initial failure we
re sufficient to break the wing spar" which is not surprising in the least.
> > Several have hypothesized that the rear spar attachment is the weak li
nk, but it MUST be the first point of failure for this to be the case. > >
IF there is anything wrong with the structure that needs to be fixed I woul
d hope that it would be the rear spar connection since that would probably
be one of the easiest scenarios to fix. > > Others have hypothesized that c
ontrol surface flutter has lead to these incidents. > > I would have to say
that even though I am not an expert in the field, I do have at minimum a b
asic understanding of structures and neither of these hypothesis are unfath
omable. > > If there isn't a design flaw it may be a simple maintenance iss
ue and specific area to check for fatigue more frequently (ie rear spar att
ach). > > If there is a design flaw, I believe that it will be relatively s
imple to correct. But more importantly I believe that the folks at Zenith a
re upstanding folks who will do the right thing. They want to know too. I a
lso believe that if it weren't for these incidents, the XL would probably b
e a top seller if not the top seller in the light sport market (I LOVE THE
DESIGN and PERFORMANCE and ECONOMY), so there is no doubt that it is hurtin
g them in my mind. If there is any one thing that I would like for Zenith a
nd the NTSB to do, it would be to release more accident photos and to rule
out as many failure scenarios as possible. In ruling out the possible failu
re scenarios, I would also like to see some of the calculations and assumpt
ions that were made in ruling out a failure mode.> > 1 thing that we know w
ith certainty is that there have been wing failures.> > To me this only lea
ves 3 possible scenarios:> > 1) Pilot error (not impossible but improbable
for ALL 4 incidents). Why have these pilot errors not shown up in the simil
ar HD and HDS models. Meaning the aircraft was stressed beyond limits?> > 2
) Design flaw (structure not adequate to resist forces using the materials
specified as designed)> > 3) Substandard Material/Workmanship Substandard/M
aintenance (Anything that isn't a design flaw or pilot error)> > 4) Did I m
iss anything?[/b]> > --------> One Rivet at a Time!> > > > > Read this topi
c online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179131#1791
======> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself wherever you are. Mobilize!
http://www.gowindowslive.com/Mobile/Landing/Messenger/Default.aspx?Locale
=en-US?ocid=TAG_APRIL
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
If the wing attach was coming loose, or something else, it would not be
unusual to see radar returns +/- a few hundred feet before the breakup.
I don't know if the suggestion is that the pilot was climbing/diving, but
it could well be they were fighting for control before the breakup.
One more comment. Regarding the pic with the hinge with the missing
part. I tested the A4/A5 rivets by making a box out of four piece's of
1"x"4"x.025 6061. Two corners with A4's, an two with solids. I then
used a hydraulic jack to pull the box apart.
In all cases the A4's failed well before the solids, and in all cases the heads
popped off. I repeated with A5's with the same results. The steel core
makes them strong in shear, but once the structure bends they are very
poor in tension.
When I tested with Solids only, The structure itself failed by tearing
around the rivet heads. The rivets did NOT fail.
On my 801, I have replace all A4's and A5's on critical assemblies with
solids. Were I building a 601 I'd definetly be attaching hinges with solids.
That's not suggesting that was the failure, however EVEN if the the
structure detached at impact - the rivets should NOT have failed. The
metal should have torn away.
I think the rivet system Zenith uses is basically good, however not for
everything.
Regards,
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179139#179139
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: Who made the parts |
Have you also thought about the fact that the fuel tanks are in the wings of
the XL and would impose a heavy load on the spar during a hard landing?
Jerry
DO NOT ARCHIVE
In a message dated 4/25/2008 10:52:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
frankroskind@HOTMAIL.COM writes:
I threw out a hypothesis that the crack might initiate on the upper surface
of the main spar in response to landing forces, because a significant design
change between the HD and the XL was the landing gear. I know the 2000 and
the 640 also hace the spring gear, but there might be some difference.
Perhaps the gear is stiffer relative to actual flying weight, so a landing with
a
light airplane might cause a very brief, very high apparent acceleration of
the wing relative to the fuselage, with a lot of torque compared to the HD
landing gear. This is analogous to how the top surface of rails cracks in
response to heavy loads imposed downward, which one might be given to believe
would crack the base of rails, but the far more common cracks initiate on the
top
surface.
> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Who made the parts
> From: michaelherder@beckgroup.com
> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:20:00 -0700
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>
>
>
> PLAV8R - wrote:
> > My question is, is it possible that AMD may have received excess
inventory (fuselage, wings, etc) from Czech Aircraft Works when Zodiac broke the
affiliation?
>
>
> Don,
>
> This is a very good question, you have read my mind. Chris's recent letter
eludes to faulty materials being a POSSIBILITY. If this is in fact the case,
that MIGHT be a cause for both the Czech and AMD aircraft, but this still
leaves us with 1 unexplained incident and one other with probable cause (flight
into IMC by inexperienced pilot).
>
> As several have stated the sequence of failure must be determined. Simply
looking at a broken spar will tell you nothing other than "the forces upon
impact were severe enough to break a wing spar" or "that the forces subsequent
to the initial failure were sufficient to break the wing spar" which is not
surprising in the least.
>
> Several have hypothesized that the rear spar attachment is the weak link,
but it MUST be the first point of failure for this to be the case.
>
> IF there is anything wrong with the structure that needs to be fixed I
would hope that it would be the rear spar connection since that would probably
be one of the easiest scenarios to fix.
>
> Others have hypothesized that control surface flutter has lead to these
incidents.
>
> I would have to say that even though I am not an expert in the field, I do
have at minimum a basic understanding of structures and neither of these
hypothesis are unfathomable.
>
> If there isn't a design flaw it may be a simple maintenance issue and
specific area to check for fatigue more frequently (ie rear spar attach).
>
> If there is a design flaw, I believe that it will be relatively simple to
correct. But more importantly I believe that the folks at Zenith are
upstanding folks who will do the right thing. They want to know too. I also believe
that if it weren't for these incidents, the XL would probably be a top seller
if not the top seller in the light sport market (I LOVE THE DESIGN and
PERFORMANCE and ECONOMY), so there is no doubt that it is hurting them in my mind.
If there is any one thing that I would like for Zenith and the NTSB to do, it
would be to release more accident photos and to rule out as many failure
scenarios as possible. In ruling out the possible failure scenarios, I would
also like to see some of the calculations and assumptions that were made in
ruling out a failure mode.
>
> 1 thing that we know with certainty is that there have been wing failures.
>
> To me this only leaves 3 possible scenarios:
>
> 1) Pilot error (not impossible but improbable for ALL 4 incidents). Why
have these pilot errors not shown up in the similar HD and HDS models. Meaning
the aircraft was stressed beyond limits?
>
> 2) Design flaw (structure not adequate to resist forces using the
materials specified as designed)
>
> 3) Substandard Material/Workmanship Substandard/Maintenance (Anything that
isn't a design flaw or pilot error)
>
> 4) Did I miss anything?[/b]
>
> --------
> One Rivet at a Time!
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179131#179131
>
>
>
>
>
>
&===================
>
>
>
____________________________________
Express yourself wherever you are. _Mobilize!_
(http://www.gowindowslive.com/Mobile/Landing/Messenger/Default.aspx?Locale=en-US?ocid=TAG_APRIL)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Larry:
?
You make some good points in your recent post, but with
regard to your statement below, I respectfully disagree.? We have some very bright
folks here and we
are highly motivated to figure this out. ?I have found the recent discussions which
have
centered around actual pictures of one of the accidents to be useful and for
the most part reverent.
Bill
601xl
do not archive
?
?
Larry said: I really want to leave the debate on what happened here to structural
engineers
who have the training and experience necessary to back up any of their analysis.
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: | Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
n85ae wrote:
> If the wing attach was coming loose, or something else, it would not be
> unusual to see radar returns +/- a few hundred feet before the breakup.
> I don't know if the suggestion is that the pilot was climbing/diving, but
> it could well be they were fighting for control before the breakup.
>
> One more comment. Regarding the pic with the hinge with the missing
> part. I tested the A4/A5 rivets by making a box out of four piece's of
> 1"x"4"x.025 6061. Two corners with A4's, an two with solids. I then
> used a hydraulic jack to pull the box apart.
>
> In all cases the A4's failed well before the solids, and in all cases the heads
popped off. I repeated with A5's with the same results. The steel core
> makes them strong in shear, but once the structure bends they are very
> poor in tension.
>
> When I tested with Solids only, The structure itself failed by tearing
> around the rivet heads. The rivets did NOT fail.
>
> On my 801, I have replace all A4's and A5's on critical assemblies with
> solids. Were I building a 601 I'd definetly be attaching hinges with solids.
>
> That's not suggesting that was the failure, however EVEN if the the
> structure detached at impact - the rivets should NOT have failed. The
> metal should have torn away.
>
> I think the rivet system Zenith uses is basically good, however not for
> everything.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff
I see your point here Jeff but to me it is not important how it failed (whether
it is the rivets or the material). Every assembly has its weakest link. Personally
I wouldnt care that the assembly failed, but rather I would seek to find
out whether or not the assembly failed prior to achieving its design strength
that was anticipated. Take another look at it from that perspective.
An engineer will design for load x, and so log as load x is adequately carried
the job is done. If the design criteria is design all assemblies such that the
sheets fail in bearing first, then obviously I would be concerned by your findings.
But I don't believe this to be the case.
--------
One Rivet at a Time!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179144#179144
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 |
|
First let me thank Sabrina for getting me to look at the photo number
28. I downloaded the pictures to look at the bolt she
questioned. (Sabrina: The bolt looks OK to me, but I'm no expert.)
When I looked at the picture something jumped out in my mind's
eye. The piece of metal the questioned last bolt is attached to is
the wing attach upright. It is ripped right down the middle. Since
this is a big piece of aluminum bent into a 90 degree angle and it is
attached to a skinny little piece of fuselage skin, it seems to me
the skin should have ripped rather than the attach upright.
Is this the root cause of the wing separation? Am I correct that
this picture shows the wing attach upright failed first and that
caused the structure failure?
I'm not sure of all this, but it sure looks that way to me. I hope
all you mechanical/aeronautical engineers will look at this and form
your own opinion.
Paul
XL fuselage
[]
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: Empty weight |
Sabrina,
Wow! 860 lbs empty.
I thought I had one of the heaviest 601Xls at 799 lbs - zero fuel, which
includes:
6x600 tires/brakes, 801 nose fork, dual brakes, dual sticks, landing lights,
wing tip strobes, wing lockers, two aux tanks, and a pretty full panel. My
MT CG is at 290 mm from leading edge datum which gives me a pretty good
loading range.
I am suprised that the "bathroom" scales you used read 10% lower that
"calibrated" scales. I used three electronic scales (I suspect they use
load cell/strain guages for weight measurement) procured at the Aerospace
Ground Support section of WalMart for my W&B.. I used a mass balance
medical scale to check the readings of the procured scales between 210 lbs
and 275 lbs and ALL readings were within ONE pound of one another.
Tony Graziano
Zodiac 601XL/Jab 3300; N493TG; 368 hrs of really fun flying; 736 landings
including just this past week 6 landings (over the power lines and over and
through the trees) and takeoffs (over the trees) from my pretty rough farm
field 1500 ft strip (The reason I went with 6x600 tires).
-------------------
Time: 03:28:07 PM PST US
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Empty weight
From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>
N5886Q's empty weight is 860 which includes 4 gallons unusable fuel. With
full
fuel, it can carry 340 pounds (My mom, dad, headsets and maps, no luggage.)
N42845's sheet shows it can carry 339 pounds with full fuel.
It is amazing that AMD reaches 770 or the Rotax listed comes in at 734.
My aircraft weighed in in the high 7s with 3 bathroom scales, but 10% more
with
scales calibrated for the range of weights actually applied to them.
(200-400
vs. 0-200)
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: Who made the partsWho made the parts |
Columbia is in South Carolina, USA; COLOMBIA in in South America.
Blue skies and tailwinds
Jim
CH-801
DeltaHawk diesel
Augusta GA
90% done, 90% left
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Smoking Gun? |
The bolt at the end of the part is showing more than four threads and a real
good chance that the nut is bottomed on the bolt.Not good but wouldn't jump
to say it caused the problem
In a message dated 4/25/2008 11:51:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
psm@att.net writes:
First let me thank Sabrina for getting me to look at the photo number 28. I
downloaded the pictures to look at the bolt she questioned. (Sabrina: The
bolt looks OK to me, but I'm no expert.)
When I looked at the picture something jumped out in my mind's eye. The
piece of metal the questioned last bolt is attached to is the wing attach
upright. It is ripped right down the middle. Since this is a big piece of
aluminum bent into a 90 degree angle and it is attached to a skinny little piece
of
fuselage skin, it seems to me the skin should have ripped rather than the
attach upright.
Is this the root cause of the wing separation? Am I correct that this
picture shows the wing attach upright failed first and that caused the structure
failure?
I'm not sure of all this, but it sure looks that way to me. I hope all you
mechanical/aeronautical engineers will look at this and form your own opinion.
Paul
XL fuselage
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
I have had a few personal inquires about my my feelings etc. I don't want this
to be my personal sounding block and will try to give out only any pertinent
information in the future. This is a place for genuine information and I apologize.
Thank you so much for your heartfelt condolences. I do not take anything that
anyone says on the forum as insensitive, I have not read anything that made me
feel distaste. Someone thought the word "neat" was in bad form. I took it more
as a comment of astonishment. I am just looking for answers. I can't stand
the idea of continuing fatalities.
I saw someone doing a loop with their Zodiac on YouTube and I just felt a pit in
my stomach. I know that many of you have worked extremely hard on your airplanes.
I have rebuilt a couple myself, but have not built one from scratch.
I can't say factually that any of these accidents were caused by the same thing.
I just feel that with all the information that is coming in the NTSB may be
able to narrow in on something.
I am sure that everyone concerned is truly trying to come to the same conclusion.
I personally don't blame anyone. I don't mean for anyone to take any of my
comments negatively in such a way that would prevent them from completing their
dream aircraft or prevent someone from purchasing a Zodiac 601 or Kit. With
all the expert people looking in to this, something will come up and I'm sure
if there is a fix (if needed), everyone will be informed.
There was the Oakdale CA. incident and then my parents in Yuba City, Ca. Followed
up the Canadian, Texas breakup and the Polk City, FL tragedy. Yes, it could
be medical issues (My parents were in good health and my father had a current
Medical). My mother was capable of landing the plane, how to disconnect the
autopilot ,and also new how to use the radio and GPS.
My father served in the U.S. Navy in the Pacific Theater during World War II.
He then transferred to the Army Air Corps and retired from the U.S.A.F. My mother,
bless her heart, would drag us six children around and create a loving new
home for us (every couple years) as we changed duty stations throughout the
world (Duty stations of Moses Lake, Washington - Alabama - Japan - Panama - South
Dakota Nebraska California Okinawa - North Carolina Greece - West Germany
- Spokane, Washington).
My father started flying after World War II, and it became a passion of his, mine,
and two of my brothers. My mother always enjoyed flying with him. In 2005,
at 78 years of age, my father and mother flew their plane from Sacramento,
CA to their native state of Minnesota (where I live) and back in their Grumman
Tiger. We were all so proud of them. We had watched them grow more and more
in love with each other over the years. On a beautiful day, while in cruise
flight (November 4, 2006), they encountered a catastrophic in-flight breakup of
their plane. I will be eternally grateful that they left together. I am also
grateful that neither of them had to suffer a lingering illness, nor that one
of them was left without the other.
Thanks again and best reards
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179157#179157
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
By The way. The Yuba City accident aircraft is in a secured area (since Nov.
5th, 2005). All parties having anything to do with maunufacturing the aircraft
along with the NTSB have access to the aircraft.
An independent investigation will not be allowed until the NTSB has released their
findings.
At that time, if anyone is interested or not satisfied with the conclusions, maybe
we can arrange to have some of the Zodiac 601 experts examine the wreckage.
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179160#179160
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Sorry (Nov. 5th 2006)
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179161#179161
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: Who made the parts |
Hi,
I agree. Please read my other post on Yuba City Photos ( I think there are 67
or so responses on it)
Thanks to all for being open minded, I am. I can handle any solid conclusion.
Of course, I would not want to hear "Pilot Error", but I can accept it if someone
can prove it to me.
Thanks,
Don
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179164#179164
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Another question. Is the trailing edge of the flaps supposed to be higher than
the ailerons (if neutralized)? Is that some kind of fix?
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179166#179166
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
What a beautiful tribute to your parents. They must have been world class a
nd we are all saddened by their loss, as well as yours.=0A=0ABobefx=0A601XL
QB=0AN642Z reserved=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: PLAV8R - <
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com>=0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Frid
ay, April 25, 2008 9:51:50 AM=0ASubject: Zenith-List: Re: CH601 Yuba City P
nehey@seagate.com>=0A=0AI have had a few personal inquires about my my feel
ings etc. I don't want this to be my personal sounding block and will try
to give out only any pertinent information in the future. This is a place
for genuine information and I apologize.=0A=0AThank you so much for your he
artfelt condolences. I do not take anything that anyone says on the forum
as insensitive, I have not read anything that made me feel distaste. Someo
ne thought the word "neat" was in bad form. I took it more as a comment of
astonishment. I am just looking for answers. I can't stand the idea of c
ontinuing fatalities.=0A=0AI saw someone doing a loop with their Zodiac on
YouTube and I just felt a pit in my stomach. I know that many of you have
worked extremely hard on your airplanes. I have rebuilt a couple myself, b
ut have not built one from scratch. I can't say factually that any of thes
e accidents were caused by the same thing. I just feel that with all the i
nformation that is coming in the NTSB may be able to narrow in on something
.=0A=0AI am sure that everyone concerned is truly trying to come to the sam
e conclusion. I personally don't blame anyone. I don't mean for anyone to
take any of my comments negatively in such a way that would prevent them f
rom completing their dream aircraft or prevent someone from purchasing a Zo
diac 601 or Kit. With all the expert people looking in to this, something
will come up and I'm sure if there is a fix (if needed), everyone will be i
nformed.=0A=0AThere was the Oakdale CA. incident and then my parents in Yub
a City, Ca. Followed up the Canadian, Texas breakup and the Polk City, FL
tragedy. Yes, it could be medical issues (My parents were in good health a
nd my father had a current Medical). My mother was capable of landing the
plane, how to disconnect the autopilot ,and also new how to use the radio a
nd GPS.=0A=0AMy father served in the U.S. Navy in the Pacific Theater durin
g World War II. He then transferred to the Army Air Corps and retired from
the U.S.A.F. My mother, bless her heart, would drag us six children aroun
d and create a loving new home for us (every couple years) as we changed du
ty stations throughout the world (Duty stations of Moses Lake, Washington -
Alabama - Japan - Panama - South Dakota =93 Nebraska =93 Calif
ornia =93 Okinawa - North Carolina =93 Greece - West Germany -
Spokane, Washington).=0A=0AMy father started flying after World War II, and
it became a passion of his, mine, and two of my brothers. My mother alway
s enjoyed flying with him. In 2005, at 78 years of age, my father and moth
er flew their plane from Sacramento, CA to their native state of Minnesota
(where I live) and back in their Grumman Tiger. We were all so proud of th
em. We had watched them grow more and more in love with each other over th
e years. On a beautiful day, while in cruise flight (November 4, 2006), th
ey encountered a catastrophic in-flight breakup of their plane. I will be
eternally grateful that they left together. I am also grateful that neithe
r of them had to suffer a lingering illness, nor that one of them was left
without the other.=0A=0AThanks again and best reards=0A=0A--------=0ADonald
J. Dennnehey Jr.=0Adonald.j.dennehey@seagate.com=0APrior Lake, Minnesota
=0ACessna 175 N7656M=0ACessna 140 N90123=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic on
line here:=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179157#179157
=========
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Mherder -
Your point is valid, and I'm not trying to suggest that rivet failure had
anything to do with the crash. However when I see an assembly that an entire row
of fasteners failed this certainly demonstrates to me that the
fasteners are weaker than the structure itself. Personally I think the
pulled rivets are inadequate for critical structures, so I personally do
not use them for critical structures.
Purely from a speculative point, if for example the aileron fluttered,
and the rivets failed this could certainly be a contributor.
Sorry if this is a deviation from the main topic.
Regards,
Jeff
> An engineer will design for load x, and so log as load x is adequately carried
the job is done. If the design criteria is design all assemblies such that the
sheets fail in bearing first, then obviously I would be concerned by your findings.
But I don't believe this to be the case.
>
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179168#179168
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
When I build and rig the plane I make my aileron slightly higher than the
flap leading edge. But the XL has some play in the flap rods so they will lift
about 2 mm each and that evens them out.
Jeff
Another question. Is the trailing edge of the flaps supposed to be higher
than the ailerons (if neutralized)? Is that some kind of fix?
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
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: Smoking Gun? |
The fact that the upright fractured the way it did, was very odd to me
as well. Staring at that picture, I didn't even notice the length of the
bolt until Sabrina pointed it out. I was busy trying to figure out how
that thick upright could have torn the way it did. After giving it some
thought, I don't suppose it is that odd though. Considering the number
of rivets and the surface area holding that upright to the skin. It is
conceivable that the upright would tear instead.
Kevin Bonds
> In a message dated 4/25/2008 11:51:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> psm@att.net writes:
>
>
> When I looked at the picture something jumped out in my mind's
> eye. The piece of metal the questioned last bolt is attached to
> is the wing attach upright. It is ripped right down the middle.
> Since this is a big piece of aluminum bent into a 90 degree angle
> and it is attached to a skinny little piece of fuselage skin, it
> seems to me the skin should have ripped rather than the attach
> upright.
>
> Is this the root cause of the wing separation? Am I correct that
> this picture shows the wing attach upright failed first and that
> caused the structure failure?
>
> I'm not sure of all this, but it sure looks that way to me. I
> hope all you mechanical/aeronautical engineers will look at this
> and form your own opinion.
>
> Paul
> XL fuselage
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings
> at AOL Autos <http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851>.
> *
>
>
> *
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
I have been looking at the photos for two days and two of them seem significant
to me after Sabrina mentioned the extra threads. I have to give Sabrina another
gold star because it is a good catch.
Photo #28 shows the longer bolt which appears to be located on the outboard side
and on top of the center spar (near a pilot's left knee). What Sabrina noted
about the bolt threads is obvious to me but what took me a while to recognize
was that there is a space between the two parts (drawing 6W4-3) where the wing
spar is missing.
Key to this realization is that the missing part is clearly shown in Photo #32.
I may have this wrong but I'm seeing photo #28 as the center spar still attached
to the right wing and photo #32 as the mating part of left wing where it
attaches to the very same bolt Sabrina mentioned. So a break did occur at this
long bolt with the extra threads.
These pictures are not random - I think the photographer is thinking the same thing
I am. However and I think it is important to realize that we don't know
what chain of events cause this particular break as it could have happened after
something else failed and even after impact with the ground as far as I know
because I can't determine the debris path from the pictures.
If I am missing something or have the pictures backwards or turned around, let
me know.
Scott Laughlin
www.cooknwithgas.com
601XL / Corvair
Finished & Flying
52 hours
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179179#179179
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/zodiac_file_032_202.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/zodiac_file_028_118.jpg
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: Empty weight |
Steve, my XL, 2974Z, weighed in at 749 lb. with a J3300 engine, wood
prop, no wheel pants, portable GPS and fire extinguisher. The CG came
out at 13.15 inches behind the L.E. datum. I'll have to be careful with
heavy pilots and low fuel. The plane was weighed with high quality
automotive digital scales that our EAA chapter 32 has.
Chuck M.
ready for FAA inspection
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Hi, List,
Sorry to be a bother, but I somehow have lost the
addresses to the pictures we are talking about. Can someone help here?
Thanks, Rick.
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Jeff,
No deviation from my feeble point of view.
Those of you that studied Jon Croke's 701 wreckage pictures also saw some
of the same type thing. Rows of rivets pulled out with almost zero
deformation of the structure. The holes weren't even deformed much. Seat
belt attach pulled out (doubler since added) for the same reason. It's
amazing how small and insignificant you think something is yet it causes a
reaction to something larger that ends up biting you in the butt. I'm
sure it's been mentioned here before but the wing flutter that disassembled
Steve Wittman's O&O Special was caused by a small piece of loose fabric
forward of the aileron, causing it to flutter , causing the wing to flutter.
If we only knew how close to the edge we really are sometimes.......
Only pulled rivets in my 701 are the ones I absolutely can't get to with a
bucking bar.
Pretend that previous sentence was deleted.
Progress is slow on the engineering front, I'm gonna call Thurston and see
if he's interested in the project in case the academic doesn't pan out. He
may want something useful to do in his spare time.
Ya'll choose up a point man so if somebody says they are ready to do it
there won't be any fumbling around. I think it needs to be a 601 guy in the
middle of this as there might be some back and forth.
There has been a lot of discussion concerning the NTSB and the FAA,
somebody might want to dig into this a little deeper but having hung around
homebuilts pretty intensely for 35 yrs or so I don't remember much from
either agency in the way of in depth engineering as to cause and effect,
maybe I just missed it (entirely possible) but if it was commercial or even
just certified G.A. the story would be different but homebuilts are pretty
much left to their own devices, or that's my impression anyway. Hope I'm
wrong but I wouldn't be putting all my chips on either of them to tell me
what happened ,why and CERTAINLY NOT how to fix it.
John
> Mherder -
>
> Your point is valid, and I'm not trying to suggest that rivet failure had
> anything to do with the crash. However when I see an assembly that an
> entire row of fasteners failed this certainly demonstrates to me that the
> fasteners are weaker than the structure itself. Personally I think the
> pulled rivets are inadequate for critical structures, so I personally do
> not use them for critical structures.
>
> Sorry if this is a deviation from the main topic.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff
>
>
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: Who made the parts |
Don excuse me if I'm getting a little confused here but was your father's accident
the one that reported the aileron trim was all the way against the stop? If
so had he ever mentioned that he had to fly it that way with two people on board?
I wonder if he had a runaway trim and had problems over coming it?
--------
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=179189#179189
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: Who made the parts |
No....I think that was the Polk City (not Positive). In fact, I talked to my brother
yesterday and it was in the neutral position.
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179194#179194
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: Empty weight |
Steve:
Don't over-analyze the BRS. You should probably just buy one and put it in. It
is less than 20 lbs in the baggage area and the other weight is spread out toward
the front. See this picture of my NASA calibrated bathroom scale:
http://www.cooknwithgas.com/10_28_06_BRS_Weight.JPG
My airplane weighs around 860 with the BRS installed. W&B works out just fine
with the BRS and it flies and stalls with easy handling. I didn't have to put
any ballast in the tail. My battery is on the firewall. More details at:
http://www.cooknwithgas.com/BRS.html
Scott Laughlin
Omaha, Nebraska
601XL/Corvair
Finished & Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179195#179195
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Don, I can speak only for myself, but the opportunity for several builders to examine
the wings and attachments might prove valuable. I'm sure really smart NTSB
folks will "solve" the mystery, but we who have built a XL know were every
bolt and rivet is supposed to be. I would fly to there for the opportunity in
my XL. Thanks and best regards, Bill Phillips
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: PLAV8R - <donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com>
Sent: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 1:06 pm
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link
By The way. The Yuba City accident aircraft is in a secured area (since Nov.
5th, 2005). All parties having anything to do with maunufacturing the aircraft
along with the NTSB have access to the aircraft.
An independent investigation will not be allowed until the NTSB has released
their findings.
At that time, if anyone is interested or not satisfied with the conclusions,
maybe we can arrange to have some of the Zodiac 601 experts examine the
wreckage.
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179160#179160
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
John,
I have heard the same thing about Homebuilt aircraft and the amount of time that
is spent investigating them. The Yuba City aircraft is one of the first certified
S-LSA's. I have been told theere would be a thorough investigation,
because of that fact. Let's hope so.
Don
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179197#179197
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: Who made the parts |
Just as food for thought, I think that it is peculiar that the Aileron trim was
fully deflected in the Polk City incident.
If I were to ever encounter mechanical loss of control in the ailerons I would
probably try to control with my electric trim which might lead to some erratic
looking banking as described prior to the fold. It may well have been very difficult
to control using aileron trim resulting in over correction and full deflection...
So many possible scenarios....
Again just food for thought, and it still doesn't apply to the the AMD incident
in November of 06.
--------
One Rivet at a Time!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179198#179198
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Hi Bill,
I have a call in right now to see if it is at all possible, for me or anyone else
to aquire photos from the NTSB or if I or a family member could go to the secured
sight and take very detailed pictures. I know they must have a diagram
of the debris field etc.
Don
japhillipsga(at)aol.com wrote:
> Don, I can speak only for myself, but the opportunity for several builders to
examine the wings and attachments might prove valuable. I'm sure really smart
NTSB folks will "solve" the mystery, but we who have built a XL know were every
bolt and rivet is supposed to be. I would fly to there for the opportunity
in my XL. Thanks and best regards, Bill Phillips
> do not archive
>
> --
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179199#179199
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
This is just speculation. Amazing how someone can state it as a well
known fact. The cause of the O & O Special crash has never been
determined. This is cautionary for those trying to understand the XL
crashes. Don't jump to conclusions. Jerry
On Apr 25, 2008, at 3:24 PM, John Bolding wrote:
> I'm sure it's been mentioned here before but the wing flutter that
> disassembled Steve Wittman's O&O Special was caused by a small piece
> of loose fabric forward of the aileron, causing it to flutter ,
> causing the wing to flutter. If we only knew how close to the edge
> we really are sometimes.......
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: | Re: Who made the parts |
>From the Polk City NTSB Report:
The electrically actuated elevator trim was in a neutral position. Continuity
of the aileron control cables was confirmed from the cockpit to both ailerons.
The electrically actuated aileron trim was positioned at the tab trailing
edge down limit. Disassembly of the aileron trim servo revealed that the mechanism
was positioned aft, in contact with a forward-facing micro-switch. The aileron
trim servo, switch, and indicator were retained for further examination.
Both wing flaps were dislodged from the stowed position, and their actuators
were broken.
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179204#179204
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Also from Polk City NTSB report:
Detailed examination of the left wing revealed that the lower main wing spar cap
was fractured at the wing root.
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179205#179205
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
...part of well designed structure is that when failed there should be both bearing
and shear failures, that is, there should be sheet metal torn away through
some of the fastener holes and fasteners sheared by the sheet metal. I was amazed
by the rows of rivet buts pulled throught the rib flanges...and all the
rows of rivets missing entirely from either component... that suggests head popping
failure modes that can be exacerbated by excessive pitch between fasteners.
Jeff,
No deviation from my feeble point of view.
Those of you that studied Jon Croke's 701 wreckage pictures also saw some
of the same type thing. Rows of rivets pulled out with almost zero
deformation of the structure. The holes weren't even deformed much. Seat
belt attach pulled out (doubler since added) for the same reason. It's
amazing how small and insignificant you think something is yet it causes a
reaction to something larger that ends up biting you in the butt. I'm
sure it's been mentioned here before but the wing flutter that disassembled
Steve Wittman's O&O Special was caused by a small piece of loose fabric
forward of the aileron, causing it to flutter , causing the wing to flutter.
If we only knew how close to the edge we really are sometimes.......
Only pulled rivets in my 701 are the ones I absolutely can't get to with a
bucking bar.
Pretend that previous sentence was deleted.
Progress is slow on the engineering front, I'm gonna call Thurston and see
if he's interested in the project in case the academic doesn't pan out. He
may want something useful to do in his spare time.
Ya'll choose up a point man so if somebody says they are ready to do it
there won't be any fumbling around. I think it needs to be a 601 guy in the
middle of this as there might be some back and forth.
There has been a lot of discussion concerning the NTSB and the FAA,
somebody might want to dig into this a little deeper but having hung around
homebuilts pretty intensely for 35 yrs or so I don't remember much from
either agency in the way of in depth engineering as to cause and effect,
maybe I just missed it (entirely possible) but if it was commercial or even
just certified G.A. the story would be different but homebuilts are pretty
much left to their own devices, or that's my impression anyway. Hope I'm
wrong but I wouldn't be putting all my chips on either of them to tell me
what happened ,why and CERTAINLY NOT how to fix it.
John
> Mherder -
>
> Your point is valid, and I'm not trying to suggest that rivet failure had
> anything to do with the crash. However when I see an assembly that an
> entire row of fasteners failed this certainly demonstrates to me that the
> fasteners are weaker than the structure itself. Personally I think the
> pulled rivets are inadequate for critical structures, so I personally do
> not use them for critical structures.
>
> Sorry if this is a deviation from the main topic.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff
>
>
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Drag Spar attach. |
Steve, when I built my XL I inserted the rear spar attachment bolts toward the
front with the washer and nut on the inside. I drilled an access hole on the bottom
of the wing in the corner big enough for a box end wrench to go in. After
a couple hours I realized I was unable to confirm during preflight inspection
that the nut was present and tight without removing the plug and flashlight
on my back up in the hole. I reversed the bolt so that the nut is now visible
between the flap and wing. I dabbed red fingernail polish on bolt end, nut and
drag spar to ensure nothing is loose or turning. Best regards, Bill of Georgia
----Original Message-----
From: steve <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
Sent: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:41 am
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Drag Spar attach.
In my case, there isnt a wing skin to fuselage problem.? Without the rubber moulding
installed it was still hard to get the drag spar bolt hole to line up.?
With the rubber installed it was about the same difficulty..
I also am thinking of making the access hole under the wing just a little bit bigger.?
That would make maintenance and inspection much easier....
?
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: Southern Reflections
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Drag Spar attach.
I drilled out 4 rivets and open the skin up,tighten,and closed the skin,wanted
to be sure it was tight. ,very hard to get to? that drag spar has always bothered
me....Joe N101HD 601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: steve
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:05 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Drag Spar attach.
Now that the drag spar is a topic I need to ask this:
?
Those of you who have installed your wings,? how difficult was it to get the bolt
into the drag spar hole ?
?
Did you need to apply rearward pressure at the wing tip to align the holes??
?
My install was a pain in the? butt.
So,? I just wonder if you had the same problem.
?
I also noted that there's a rivet that keeps the left drag spar attach plates from
mating flush with each other.? Today I plan on removing that rivet to make
sure there is no stress.
This rivet is the very last inboard rivet in the wing at
6W7-2.....
And this is a QBK......
?
Steve
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matronhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matronhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
I believe this is why the Sonex uses the Stainless Steel Cherry rivets.
-Bruce Johnson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of n85ae
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 10:02 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link
If the wing attach was coming loose, or something else, it would not be
unusual to see radar returns +/- a few hundred feet before the breakup.
I don't know if the suggestion is that the pilot was climbing/diving, but
it could well be they were fighting for control before the breakup.
One more comment. Regarding the pic with the hinge with the missing
part. I tested the A4/A5 rivets by making a box out of four piece's of
1"x"4"x.025 6061. Two corners with A4's, an two with solids. I then
used a hydraulic jack to pull the box apart.
In all cases the A4's failed well before the solids, and in all cases the
heads popped off. I repeated with A5's with the same results. The steel core
makes them strong in shear, but once the structure bends they are very
poor in tension.
When I tested with Solids only, The structure itself failed by tearing
around the rivet heads. The rivets did NOT fail.
On my 801, I have replace all A4's and A5's on critical assemblies with
solids. Were I building a 601 I'd definetly be attaching hinges with solids.
That's not suggesting that was the failure, however EVEN if the the
structure detached at impact - the rivets should NOT have failed. The
metal should have torn away.
I think the rivet system Zenith uses is basically good, however not for
everything.
Regards,
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179139#179139
Checked by AVG.
7:42 AM
Checked by AVG.
7:42 AM
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: Empty weight |
depaending on the crap you choose to put in your Steed, I see them coming in at
approximately 700 to 770 Lbs. Anything over 800 lbs, makes for a tough sell
at resale time.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: steve <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
>Sent: Apr 24, 2008 9:05 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Empty weight
>
>
>Thats bad news for me.. If my 601 XL comes in at 800# the BRS is out.....
>
>SW
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 4:08 PM
>Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Empty weight
>
>
>>
>> Low reading bathrooms scales! Can I have them?
>>
>> -- Craig
>>
>> Do not archive
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sabrina
>> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 4:25 PM
>> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Empty weight
>>
>>
>> N5886Q's empty weight is 860 which includes 4 gallons unusable fuel. With
>> full fuel, it can carry 340 pounds (My mom, dad, headsets and maps, no
>> luggage.)
>>
>> N42845's sheet shows it can carry 339 pounds with full fuel.
>>
>> It is amazing that AMD reaches 770 or the Rotax listed comes in at 734.
>>
>> My aircraft weighed in in the high 7s with 3 bathroom scales, but 10% more
>> with scales calibrated for the range of weights actually applied to them.
>> (200-400 vs. 0-200)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179036#179036
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
That's exactly what the findings were . It was challenged the last time I
mentioned it and someone dug up the report and lo and behold, there it was.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Hey" <jerry@jerryhey.com>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link
>
> This is just speculation. Amazing how someone can state it as a well
> known fact. The cause of the O & O Special crash has never been
> determined. This is cautionary for those trying to understand the XL
> crashes. Don't jump to conclusions. Jerry
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2008, at 3:24 PM, John Bolding wrote:
>
>> I'm sure it's been mentioned here before but the wing flutter that
>> disassembled Steve Wittman's O&O Special was caused by a small piece of
>> loose fabric forward of the aileron, causing it to flutter , causing the
>> wing to flutter. If we only knew how close to the edge we really are
>> sometimes.......
>
>
>
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
S. Wittman Accident report link: http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id
001207X03218&key=1
Text of probable cause:
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn April 27, 1995, about 1210 central daylight time, a Wit
tman O&O (Ocala and Oshkosh) experimental airplane, N41SW, registered to a
private owner, operating as a 14 CFR Part 91 personal flight, experienced a
n in-flight breakup about 7 miles south of Stevenson, Alabama. Visual meteo
rological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed. The commercial
pilot and pilot-rated passenger were fatally injured. The airplane was des
troyed. The flight originated about 2 hours 40 minutes before the accident.
The airplane was reported overdue on April 28, 1995, and was located on Ap
ril 29, 1995.According to friends of the pilot, this was his annual return
flight to Oshkosh, Wisconsin. One of the friends stated that he conducted a
preflight inspection of the airplane, and did not discover any problems. A
ccording to another friend, the pilot had planned his flight to avoid flyin
g through controlled airspace, and the need to establish radio contact. The
flight departed without incident. No radio communication was reported betw
een air traffic and the flight. At the approximate time of the accident, se
veral local residents reported hearing an airplane in the vicinity of the a
ccident site. These witnesses were located in a valley and on a mountain ri
dge; none of the witnesses actually saw the airplane in flight. Their accou
nts varied from hearing a high revving engine to hearing an explosion. One
witness at the Stevenson Airport reported hearing a sonic boom, but did not
see or hear a jet aircraft in the vicinity of the airport. According to Me
mphis Air Route Traffic Control Center, there were no military aircraft ope
rating on the military training routes at the approximate time of the accid
ent. On April 28, 1995, friends of the pilot became concerned about the loc
ation of the airplane, since it never arrived at the planned destination. T
he Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued an alert notice, and a sear
ch for the missing airplane was initiated. On April 29, 1995, at 1830, debr
is from N41SW was located in the vicinity of strip mines, south of Stevenso
n. A massive ground and aerial search located the main wreckage early the f
ollowing morning. PERSONNEL INFORMATIONInformation about the pilot is inclu
ded in this report under the data field labeled "First Pilot Information".
A review of the pilot's airmen records disclosed that he had acquired sever
al pilot ratings which included certified flight instructor. The pilot had
also held an airframe and powerplant (A & P) mechanic's rating. The pilot's
flight logs were not recovered for examination. Medical history on the pil
ot was limited, since his attending physician died several months before th
is accident. A review of the pilot's FAA medical records failed to disclose
a dramatic shift in the pilot's medical condition. During his last flight
physical examination, the pilot had an elevated blood pressure reading. The
pilot was requested to provide additional medical information to the FAA A
eromedical Division. On May 12, 1995, the FAA reviewed the additional data
and declared that Mr. Wittman was medically qualified to hold a second clas
s airmen medical certificate. According to friends of the pilot, he maintai
ned a fit lifestyle, and they could not recall any extended medical treatme
nt the pilot had received in recent years. Information on the second pilot
is included in this factual report as NTSB Form 6120.4, Supplement E. AIRCR
AFT INFORMATIONInformation about the aircraft is included in this report un
der the data field labeled "Aircraft Information". According to the chairma
n and founder of the EAA, the Wittman O & O experimental airplane was a one
-of-a-kind aircraft, and there was no design or performance information ava
ilable for airplane. A review of aircraft data revealed that Mr. S.J. Wittm
an was issued the experimental operating limitations for the O & O experime
ntal airplane on January 6, 1985. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATIONVisual meteorol
ogical conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. Weather informatio
n is contained in this report under the data field labeled "Weather Informa
tion". According to the weather study conducted by the National Transportat
ion Safety Board, the 1200 weather plot showed southwest surface winds with
wind speeds variable between 10 and 20 knots. Upper level winds between th
e surface and 10,000 feet in the vicinity of the accident site, were out of
the southwest between 15 and 20 knots. The weather study also concluded th
at no significant wind shear was likely, but occasional light to moderate l
ow level turbulence was possible in the vicinity of the accident site. WREC
KAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONDebris from the airplane was scattered in a ravi
ne over an area 1.25 miles long, on Sand Mountain (see the wreckage distrib
ution diagram). Examination of the accident site and wreckage disclosed tha
t the airplane separated into four major components: both wings, the empenn
age section, and the main fuselage. They were scattered within an area .25
miles long. Other wreckage debris was scattered over an additional mile.Exa
mination of the accident site disclosed that wreckage debris was scattered
on a southwesterly heading. The first pieces of the wreckage debris were fo
und in the coal mining area near the location of the emergency management c
ommand post (see the wreckage diagram). A piece of aircraft skin, with the
letters O and O printed on it was recovered with the debris near the coal m
ines. This piece of skin material was subsequently identified as part of N4
1SW. Other debris located in the vicinity of the strip coal mines included
plexiglass material and yellow painted fabric material. The southwest trail
of debris, which included aircraft fabric, paint chips, personal items of
the occupants, and flight charts, continued for about a mile where the larg
er pieces of the airframe were located. The left wing assembly was located
in a heavily wooded area about a mile southwest of the wreckage debris at t
he mining area. The left wing was located on a steep ridge near a creek. An
examination of the left wing assembly disclosed that the main wood spar wa
s fractured through the lateral plane of the bolted wing-to-fuselage attach
ment fitting. The fracture plane extended from the inboard end of the spar
about 34 inches outboard. The front wing-to-fuselage spar attachment fittin
g was bent aft about 3 degrees and twisted about 5 degrees in the wing lead
ing edge down direction. Both the front and the rear wing-to-fuselage spar
attachment fittings exhibited damage, eg., twisting, bending, rear wood spa
r fracture, or damage to fuselage clevis tang attachment webs.About 6 inche
s of the wing lift strut stub remained attached to the fuselage. The lift s
trut exhibited some slight column buckling (downward) about 16 inches from
the spar attachment fitting.The left wing aileron and flap were missing in
their entirety. The outboard aileron hinge attachment bolt/washer had broac
hed a clean round hole, about 1-inch in diameter, through the secondary (fa
lse) rear spar and hinge block. The entire wing tip structure assembly (inc
luding dope/fabric) was relatively intact and remained attached to the rema
inder of the wing. The fabric remaining on the top and bottom surfaces of t
he wing was, for the most part, doped in place except in those areas adjace
nt to the wing skin fracture lines. The dope was distressed or missing on t
he aft inboard portion of the wing upper surface and along the entire lengt
h of the top of the main spar.The right wing was located on the mountain ri
dge about 200 yards southwest of the left wing assembly. The main wood spar
was cracked/split through the lateral plane of the bolted wing-to-fuselage
attachment fitting. The primary fracture plane extended from the inboard e
nd of the spar to about 43 inches outboard (to the wing lift strut reinforc
ed area). The spar, outboard of this section, was cracked and twisted throu
ghout its entire length. All wood ribs aft of the main spar were missing.Th
e front wing-to-fuselage spar attachment fitting was attached to the fusela
ge clevis rear tang. The forward clevis tang was pulled out of the fuselage
.The right aileron was missing. The outboard portion of the flap, from the
center hinge outboard, was bent down about 10 degrees. The inboard area of
the flap exhibited rearward bending distress/buckling. The flap inboard and
middle hinge fittings were intact but pulled out of the secondary (false)
rear spar; the outboard fitting was broken off.The flap and aileron bellcra
nk clamps remained attached to the inboard end of the concentric flap and a
ileron tubes. The aileron tube was fractured at the outboard flap hinge sta
tion. The aileron upper bellcrank was broken at the clamp. The flap push-pu
ll control rod was missing and the bellcranks had broken at the upper (clam
ped) and lower ends.The entire fabric covering on the upper and lower surfa
ces of the wing had delaminated from the wing skin. The doped finish was se
verely distressed and mottled. The empennage section was located about 200
yards further up the mountain ledge from the right wing assembly. Examinati
on of the empennage revealed that the left horizontal stabilizer and elevat
or assembly was missing. The left horizontal stabilizer forward attach bolt
was fractured; a threaded portion of the bolt was still in the nut plate.
The right horizontal stabilizer and elevator assemblies were attached to th
e airframe. The vertical fin was attached to the airframe but had been defl
ected 90 degrees right from its installed position. The rudder, with the fi
xed trim tab and rudder horn, was attached to the airframe. The tailwheel a
ssembly was attached to the airframe at the accident site. The fuselage exa
mination also determined that a 33-inch section of the tubular truss fusela
ge had fractured, aft of the baggage compartment, and was missing. The cabi
n and cockpit areas sustained impact damage which reduced the livable space
. The examination of the airframe revealed that the fractured tubes showed
evidence of multiple bending failures in random directions. Examination of
the flight control stick assembly disclosed that the aileron torque tube ne
ar the bolted connection immediately below the middle stick was fractured.
The fracture faces exhibited rotational scuffing. MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL
INFORMATIONPost-mortem examination of the pilot was conducted by Dr. Joseph
H. Embry, Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences, Birmingham, Alabama, on
May 2, 1995. The cause of death was multiple blunt force injuries.Toxicolo
gical samples were shipped to the Federal Aviation Administration Aeronauti
cal Center for examination. According to the manager of the Toxicological a
nd Accident Research Laboratory, the toxicological samples arrived in very
poor condition, and the findings were possibly the result of postmortem put
refaction. The toxicological examinations detected the following levels of
ethanol, 1-butanol, and acetaldehyde:34.000 mg/dl and 37.000 mg/dl of ethan
ol in muscle and lung samples 4.000 mg/dl of butanol in both muscle and lun
g samples 3.000 mg/dl of acetaldehyde in the lung sample.TEST AND RESEARCHS
everal fractured components from the airframe were submitted to the NTSB Ma
terials Laboratory Division for examination, (see the Metallurgist Factual
Report for list of components examined). The examination of the listed comp
onents revealed no evidence of preexisting cracking, and all fracture areas
were representative of overstress separations. The left horizontal forward
attach bolt also failed in overstress.A small section of the wing wood and
fabric material was removed for examination. "The examination disclosed th
at the mahogany plywood had been coated with clear Nitrate Dope". Next, the
builder covered the plywood withStits 150 pound poly-fiber. The builder ne
xt brushed a coat of nitrate dope over the layer of poly-fiber followed by
a clear coat of butyrate dope. Finally, several coats of poly-spray and yel
low poly-tone were sprayed over the coat butyrate dope. According to Mr. Ra
y Stits, President of Stits Aircraft, the above stated process does not pro
vide the best adhesive qualities. The builder should have first applied two
coats of poly-brush on the bare plywood, (see the Poly-Fiber Covering and
Painting Manual). Primary radar data from Memphis Air Route Traffic Control
Center was recovered for examination. A review of this data disclosed that
N41SW was flying a northerly heading at an unspecified altitude when radar
contact was lost. The radar data study could only recover ground speed and
magnetic heading information. During the last three minutes of the recorde
d data, the ground speed increased from 150 knots to 190 knots. The radar d
ata also indicated the airplane had entered a turn. The rate and direction
of turn was not determined. Turn Information was based upon the change in r
adar reflection of the target. The radar data also revealed that the last r
adar hit was north of where the aircraft wreckage was located on the ground
. The wreckage distribution was 180 degrees from the original flight headin
g. (See the Specialist report of investigation conducted by the NTSB Office
of Research and Engineering).The aircraft wreckage was released to Mr. Pau
l H. Poberezny, EAA, Founder/Chairman of The Board,POB 3086, Oshkosh, Wisco
nsin, 54903.
do not archive> From: jerry@jerryhey.com> To: zenith-list@matronics.com> Su
bject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link> Date: Fri, 25 Apr
jerryhey.com>> > This is just speculation. Amazing how someone can state it
as a well > known fact. The cause of the O & O Special crash has never bee
n > determined. This is cautionary for those trying to understand the XL >
crashes. Don't jump to conclusions. Jerry> > > On Apr 25, 2008, at 3:24 PM,
John Bolding wrote:> > > I'm sure it's been mentioned here before but the
wing flutter that > > disassembled Steve Wittman's O&O Special was caused b
y a small piece > > of loose fabric forward of the aileron, causing it to f
lutter , > > causing the wing to flutter. If we only knew how close to the
========================> _
===============> > >
_________________________________________________________________
In a rush? Get real-time answers with Windows Live Messenger.
http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refr
esh_realtime_042008
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: Who made the parts |
Has the report been revised or did I misunderstand when I originally read it.
If so I sincerely apologize for posting information that was a figment of my imagination...
--------
One Rivet at a Time!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179216#179216
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: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure |
Gig, there may have been an issue with the elevator pins as well, but I know they
were for the flap pins because I remember I checked with Spruce for replacements
and they did not carry pins longer than six feet and the flap pin for a
XL is longer than that. I had to wait for ZAC to send the long relpacements. Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net>
Sent: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 9:44 am
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure
The notice I received was for the elevator hinge not the flap hinge. Can someone
confirm if the flap hinge was also covered by the notice?
JAPhillipsGA(at)aol.com wrote:
> When I was building my XL in 2004 & 5 ZAC sent out flap hinges in the kits
with aluminum pins instead of steel pins. They contacted us (me) and replaced
the pins for free. Could it be that the XLs with aileron hinges instead of the
sheet metal bend attachment has these aluminum pins ? If so they might be
failing ? Just a thought. Best regards, Bill
--------
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=179125#179125
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: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure |
Has it been determined that all of the accidents were to kit built planes and no
scratch builts?
It shows' clearly in the plans that it calls for a stainless pin, but you have
to buy that seperately, at least from Aircraft Spruce. My aileron hinges from
Zenith I believe came with the aluminum pin, but with a SS pin that you replace
the aluminum pin with.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179221#179221
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: I must say................... |
Maybe someone can compile a list from all of the threads as possibles and things
to check. I don't have that kind of time to do it. But maybe looking at a list
of everything that's been suggested or whatever, you know, all in one list,
reading that in a concise format, and then rereading it, a lightbuld may come
on that no one here has thought of, or, that someone has thought of, but it becomes
that much more obvious whether there is a problem or not, and if there
is, what it is.
For all I know the plae could be perfectly fine, personally, I think it's an awesome
design, I just want to know it truly is safe, safe enough to the point that
if you break it, was was in fact pilot error and done way outside of a normal
design and flight envelope.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179223#179223
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: Empty weight |
Thanks Chuck and others. The 749 would be doable for my flying ..
----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck & Lana Maggart
To: Zenith-List Digest Server
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Empty weight
Steve, my XL, 2974Z, weighed in at 749 lb. with a J3300 engine, wood
prop, no wheel pants, portable GPS and fire extinguisher. The CG came
out at 13.15 inches behind the L.E. datum. I'll have to be careful with
heavy pilots and low fuel. The plane was weighed with high quality
automotive digital scales that our EAA chapter 32 has.
Chuck M.
ready for FAA inspection
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: Aileron Hinge Pins Failure |
It was the elevator hinge pin from May 2003. Attached is the letter. It is in the
Bulletins/Updates area of the builders section.
Scott
--------
601 XL kit N596SW reserved
Tail, control surfaces and both wings complete. Now working on fuselage
www.scottwaters.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179225#179225
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/601_hinge_pin_497.pdf
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
The 601XL flaps are designed to be 3mm higher than the trailing edge of the
wing. The ailerons are flush with the trailing edge of the wing
George May
601XL 912s> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link> From: do
nald.j.dennehey@seagate.com> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:43:38 -0700> To: zen
nald.j.dennehey@seagate.com>> > Another question. Is the trailing edge of t
he flaps supposed to be higher than the ailerons (if neutralized)? Is that
some kind of fix?> > --------> Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.> donald.j.dennehey@s
eagate.com> Prior Lake, Minnesota> Cessna 175 N7656M> Cessna 140 N90123> >
> > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic
========================> _
=============> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Back to work after baby'how do you know when you=92re ready?
http://lifestyle.msn.com/familyandparenting/articleNW.aspx?cp-documentid=
5797498&ocid=T067MSN40A0701A
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Thanks George,
I wanted to confirm. My brother (he and my Dad flew the AMD 601XL S-SLA) had
told me that the flaps basically were appr. 1/4 inch higher at the trailing edge
than the ailerons.
--------
Donald J. Dennnehey Jr.
donald.j.dennehey@seagate.com
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Cessna 175 N7656M
Cessna 140 N90123
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179230#179230
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
I think that it is also very important for all the amateur investigators to keep
in mind that an airplane crashing into the ground, or any other rather solid
object, will sustain a LOT of damage from the crash alone. How do we know for
certain that any broken broken part was broken BEFORE the crash impact; and not
BY the crash impact?
Jay in Dallas
Jerry Hey <jerry@jerryhey.com> wrote:
>
>This is just speculation. Amazing how someone can state it as a well
>known fact. The cause of the O & O Special crash has never been
>determined. This is cautionary for those trying to understand the XL
>crashes. Don't jump to conclusions. Jerry
>
>
>On Apr 25, 2008, at 3:24 PM, John Bolding wrote:
>
>> I'm sure it's been mentioned here before but the wing flutter that
>> disassembled Steve Wittman's O&O Special was caused by a small piece
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: | Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Compare pictures 19 and 31 with picture 27 in the Yuba City accident. Look at the
rear spar bolt hole. One's torn (19 and 31), and it appears as though the other
is not (27). This would jive with what Mark Townsend said, that the rear
spar bolts were missing, at least on of them anyway. It appears as though the
one slid right out allowing the wing to flap around like crazy, leading the other
too eventually ret ripped out once things got interesting.
Picture 29 would have been a good comparison if that guy wasn't standing in the
way. It sure looks like the rear spar attach in 27 in unscathed.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179235#179235
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: | As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. |
Compare pictures 19 and 31 with picture 27 in the Yuba City accident. Look at the
rear spar bolt hole. One's torn (19 and 31), and it appears as though the other
is not (27). This would jive with what Mark Townsend said, that the rear
spar bolts were missing, at least on of them anyway. It appears as though the
one slid right out allowing the wing to flap around like crazy, leading the other
wing to eventually get ripped out once things got interesting.
Picture 29 would have been a good comparison if that guy wasn't standing in the
way. It sure looks like the rear spar attach in 27 in unscathed.
Why don't they post these pics on NTSB and let people think and see for themselves.
What nanny-state.
Anybody can post anything they want on Youtube with practically no one's approval,
and something like this, from an alleged public safety organization, gets
buried. Ridiculous.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179238#179238
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
DO NOT ARCHIVE
http://www.chemroc.com/CH601/Post_crash.zip
Jim
Beckman, Rick wrote:
>
>
> Hi, List,
> Sorry to be a bother, but I somehow have lost the
> addresses to the pictures we are talking about. Can someone help here?
> Thanks, Rick.
>
>
>
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: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. |
After checking the NTSB, the only two accidents I feel that are unexplained are
Oakdale, CA and Polk City FL.
If Yuba was no bolt, there's still no explanation for a wing fold after making
a circling right in CA or some turns down in FL.
Texas, obviously the guy fly into IMC. England, going fast and pull up hard, yeah,
your wings are going to come off.
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179256#179256
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: | Re: Who made the parts |
Craig,=0A=0ALooking at the Zenith web site you would believe that the facto
r in is Missouri. Not south America. No where do they tell you that the kit
s are not made in the USA.=0AAnything else you by in the US has a " made in
or Assembled in" label on it. Not the kit. Not all kits were made in Colum
bia. Some were made elsewhere but Roger would not tell me where. Zenith wou
ld not confirm where all the parts were built. There is some sub-contractin
g done. Read the letter from Chris, he has left that door open.=0A =0ABobef
x=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Craig Payne <craig@craigandje
an.com>=0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 3:
07:00 PM=0ASubject: RE: Zenith-List: Who made the parts=0A=0A=0AFor the QBK
s I believe the parts are made in North America just like the kit parts and
then shipped to AeroLeaver in Bogot=E1. You can see photos of the jigging
and assembly process at AeroLeaver on Zenith=92s web site here:=0A =0Ahttp:
//www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/xl-qbk.html=0A =0AZenith has never made a sec
ret of this. A caption on this page says =93Fuselage construction jig at th
e AeroLeaver factory=94:=0A =0Ahttp://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/xl-qbk-ph
otos1.html=0A =0A-- Craig=0A =0AFrom: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.co
m [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Davis
=0ASent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 3:41 PM=0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.com
=0ASubject: Re: Zenith-List: Who made the parts=0A =0AHi Jay,=0A=0AI think
bob was referring to the QuickBuild kits which are outsourced. Mine was bui
lt by AeroLever in Columbia (south american not SC)=0A=0AJohn=0A=0AJaybanni
=0ABob,=0A =0AThink about it. If all the kits are subcontracted, then wh
y does ZAC have all that CNC and metal-forming equipment in their factory i
n Mexico? What do you think they are they making, lawn chairs? I think you
have swallowed some real bad mis-information. Please don't pass it around a
s the truth.=0A =0AJay in Dallas=0A =0A =0ABob Sturgis <bobefx@yahoo.com
> wrote:=0A =0A =0AI understand that they subconrtact the kits out. I hav
e been told that no kit is actuley made by Zenith or Zenair, it's all done
outside of north America.=0ABobefx =0A =0A =0A----- Original Message ----
=0AFrom: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>=0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.co
m=0ASent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 12:13:49 PM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith-List:
maynard@conmicro.com>=0A =0AOn Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:05:29AM -0700, Bob
Sturgis wrote:=0A =0AAMD does not build from scratch or do they.=0A
=0AAMD builds from kits supplied by Zenair in Canada.=0A-- =0AJay Maynard,
K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com=0Ahttp://jmaynard.livejourna
l.com http://www.tronguy.net=0AFairmont, MN (FRM)
(Yes, that's me!)=0AAMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, deliver
y 2 June)=0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A </=====
============= http://www.matron - cont
ent also available via the Web href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://
forums.matronics.com ==================
==============
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: Who made the partsWho made the parts |
so we all can't spell as well as u can :-)
----- Original Message ----
From: Jim McBurney <jmcburney@pobox.com>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:23:28 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Who made the partsWho made the parts
Columbia is in South Carolina, USA; COLOMBIA in in South America.
Blue skies and tailwinds
Jim
CH-801
DeltaHawk diesel
Augusta GA
90% done, 90% left
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 |
|
Hi all-
Just trying to get in a flying state of mind. Sitting here in Northern Minnesota,
it's nearly May, and we're expecting 11-15 inches of SNOW by tomorrow morning
(third weekend out of the last 4 with more than a foot of snow) I dug out
my Dad's Oscar Brand records about flying. I then remembered that a couple years
ago I converted them to mp3's and uploaded the to my web server. So, if you
have the desire to hear some fun, polite flying songs if you follow this link
you'll go to a directory of the tunes and you can download and save the mp3s.
And for those of you who fear I'm pirating music--if you find a legitimate source
to buy these songs, let me know. You can sometimes find a collection with
a couple of them, but not all.
To make this "on topic" you can consider it music to build to, or music to fly
by. Sometimes, I just think we need to interject just a teensy bit of fun into
things!
Tim in Bovey
http://www.edselmotors.com/oscarbrand/
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
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: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. |
Just asking, in all seriousness, because I've lost track; was the Spanish incident
explained, or did that turn out not to be a wing fold?
Doug
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179264#179264
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: | New Project Problems |
I just started building a new 601XL and last night I fitted the brakes and
mounted the axles and tires and that took about 3 hours but then I started the
mount the front fork to the main gear tube and looked at how far off the weld
is.... I am a bit concerned that the QC is not up to par. You would think
they would have a fixture made for this and they would be exact. I have added
a
link to a couple pics of the off set between the steering rods and the nose
wheel fork.
_http://www.project601xl.com/New_Plane.html_
(http://www.project601xl.com/New_Plane.html)
Jeff
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
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: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. |
I don't know. It's looking like this one may be solved. If someone can produce
a photo of the other side of the attachment (the fuslage side) then I'd say this
one is confired as far as no bolt. Certainly looks that way though.
dfmoeller wrote:
> Just asking, in all seriousness, because I've lost track; was the Spanish incident
explained, or did that turn out not to be a wing fold?
>
> Doug
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179273#179273
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: Who made the parts |
Doug, They may make most of the parts there but the kit is assembled elsewhere.
My kit had vary poor quality control on the assembly. Parts install in the wrong
place, sloppy hole drilling, I know they are done with CNC but no CNC has
ever drilled holes like these. Just in some areas, small areas. Crushed wing tip
in crate with do damage to crate or the foam around the crush. Just poor quality
control. Landing gear with a crack big enough for me to slide a razor blade
into it. Etc. If the Quality Control had been as good as I think the 601 is,
I would have no complaint.
Bobefx
do not archive
----- Original Message ----
From: MacDonald Doug <dougsnash@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 3:36:48 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Who made the parts
Bob, I've been to the factory and seen them building
kit components with my own eyes. If you have such
concerns, a trip to Mexico, MO might be in order.
Doug MacDonald
CH-701 Scratch Builder
NW Ontario
DO NOT ARCHIVE
--- Bob Sturgis <bobefx@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I understand that they subconrtact the kits out. I
> have been told that no kit is actuley made by Zenith
> or Zenair, it's all done outside of north America.
> Bobefx
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 12:13:49 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Who made the parts
>
> <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
>
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:05:29AM -0700, Bob
> Sturgis wrote:
> > AMD does not build from scratch or do they.
>
> AMD builds from kits supplied by Zenair in Canada.
> --
> Jay Maynard, K5ZC
> http://www.conmicro.com
> http://jmaynard.livejournal.com
> http://www.tronguy.net
> Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes,
> that's me!)
> AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March,
> delivery 2 June)
>
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
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: New Project Problems |
Jeff, My point, Quality Control, it is vary lacking.
'
Bobefx
----- Original Message ----
From: "Afterfxllc@aol.com" <Afterfxllc@aol.com>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 6:02:22 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: New Project Problems
I just started building a new 601XL and last night I fitted the brakes and mounted
the axles and tires and that took about 3 hours but then I started the mount
the front fork to the main gear tube and looked at how far off the weld is....
I am a bit concerned that the QC is not up to par. You would think they would
have a fixture made for this and they would be exact. I have added a link
to a couple pics of the off set between the steering rods and the nose wheel fork.
http://www.project601xl.com/New_Plane.html
Jeff
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Well, if a particular part (like the ailerons) came to rest hundreds of feet from
the other part where it was originally attached, there is no need to be an
expert to now that the separation did not happened when the parts impacted the
ground.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami Florida
http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom
I think that it is also very important for all the amateur investigators to keep
in mind that an airplane crashing into the ground, or any other rather solid
object, will sustain a LOT of damage from the crash alone. How do we know for
certain that any broken broken part was broken BEFORE the crash impact; and not
BY the crash impact?
Jay in Dallas
Jerry Hey wrote:
>
>This is just speculation. Amazing how someone can state it as a well
>known fact. The cause of the O & O Special crash has never been
>determined. This is cautionary for those trying to understand the XL
>crashes. Don't jump to conclusions. Jerry
>
>
>On Apr 25, 2008, at 3:24 PM, John Bolding wrote:
>
>> I'm sure it's been mentioned here before but the wing flutter that
>> disassembled Steve Wittman's O&O Special was caused by a small piece
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: | Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case |
closed.
I've been following the Spanish incident, there is no official report of probable
cause yet but local news reported a witness who heard the sound of an explosion
and when he looked up, he saw the plane falling with one wing folded.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami Florida
http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom
Just asking, in all seriousness, because I've lost track; was the Spanish incident
explained, or did that turn out not to be a wing fold?
Doug
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179264#179264
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: New Project Problems |
My personal experience is that I have not encountered ANY quality control issues
thus far. In fact every time that I have found an issue that I suspected was
a QC issue I found that it was not after all. I would consider myself to be
pretty picky too. Very picky.
But I will agree that perhaps your front gear is a little twisted. I'd be willing
to bet my paycheck that all you would have to do is contact Shirley, send
a pic and you will have a new one in a week or less.
--------
One Rivet at a Time!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179286#179286
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 |
|
If you think you understand Va, you need to read this NTSB accident report.
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAR0404.pdf
American 587, an Airbus A-300 that lost its vertical stabilizer due to full rudder
deflections BELOW Va on a certified aircraft. I was working with a team redesigning
some structure on the B-777 vertical at the time and we had a lot of
discussion about this accident.
VA is defined as the speed at which a full control deflection can be made abruptly
and the aircraft will stall before any damage results to the airframe.
Chris H has given us a fix that will reduce the amount of elevator deflection available.
So even though there is no evidence that Sub VA flight has ever resulted
in a failure it will be much harder to overstress the airframe.
But remember, even if you install the fix it is not a license to slam the stick
forward.
--------
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=175805#175805
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 |
|
That is the perfect example of how VA is not a "get out of jail free" pa
ss....
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
-- Jimbo <jimandmandy@yahoo.com> wrote:
If you think you understand Va, you need to read this NTSB accident repo
rt.
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAR0404.pdf
American 587, an Airbus A-300 that lost its vertical stabilizer due to f
ull rudder deflections BELOW Va on a certified aircraft. I was working w
ith a team redesigning some structure on the B-777 vertical at the time
and we had a lot of discussion about this accident.
Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net> wrote:--> Zenith-List message po
sted by: "Gig Giacona"
VA is defined as the speed at which a full control deflection can be mad
e abruptly and the aircraft will stall before any damage results to the
airframe.
Chris H has given us a fix that will reduce the amount of elevator defle
ction available. So even though there is no evidence that Sub VA flight
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
====
_____________________________________________________________
Let your voice be heard! Click here and get paid to participate in surve
ys!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4s0OscL8JtEmXXdGsyl
vWkxF1X2i3DFHYlPkAWg7qqeKL37c/
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: New Project Problems |
I'm not upset about it and I know Zenith will make it right and this is my
3rd 601 so been there done that but the point was that this is such a simple
welded piece that it should be dead on.
My personal experience is that I have not encountered ANY quality control
issues thus far. In fact every time that I have found an issue that I
suspected was a QC issue I found that it was not after all. I would consider
myself
to be pretty picky too. Very picky.
But I will agree that perhaps your front gear is a little twisted. I'd be
willing to bet my paycheck that all you would have to do is contact Shirley,
send a pic and you will have a new one in a week or less.
do not archive
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
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: | Re: New Project Problems |
I've had two quality problems with my QBK, both acknowledged by the factory:
- The holes in the upper motor mount brackets did not align with the holes
in the firewall. They were off by 1/8 of an inch. Zenith sent me new,
undrilled motor mount brackets but they were of the new triangular style so
I had to do some rework.
- more seriously all four outer bolt holes in the center spare (two per
side) are 6 to 10 thousandths over. Because the other holes in the center
spar are within spec (and ALL the holes in the wing spare) is seem very
likely that the problem holes were enlarged when the holes in the spar
uprights (6B13-1) were line-drilled. The factory doesn't have a good fix for
this one. Roger quotes CH as saying that 12 thou is within spec but I don't
buy it. The plans called for all these holes to be precision reamed. Note
that because the corresponding holes in the wing spars are NOT oversized I
can't just use a larger bolt even if I could find one.
The only fix I can think of is to remove the center spar from the fuselage,
bolt it to each wing in turn and drill/ream the holes to 3/8ths. I don't
think it is feasible to do this with the center spar in the fuselage. But
another QBK builder is investigating that solution. Luckily I have had a lot
of practice drilling out rivets.
In a few years it will be interesting to look at quality issues (if any)
with Van's RV-12 and Ran's S-19.
BTW: the bottom plate on my front gear tube was square but shifted to one
side by a little under 1/8th of an inch.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MHerder
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:43 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: New Project Problems
My personal experience is that I have not encountered ANY quality control
issues thus far. In fact every time that I have found an issue that I
suspected was a QC issue I found that it was not after all. I would
consider myself to be pretty picky too. Very picky.
But I will agree that perhaps your front gear is a little twisted. I'd be
willing to bet my paycheck that all you would have to do is contact Shirley,
send a pic and you will have a new one in a week or less.
--------
One Rivet at a Time!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179286#179286
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: Who made the parts |
DO NOT ARCHIVE
"Crushed wing tip in crate with do damage to crate "
Mine also. See photos:
http://www.chemroc.com/CH601/rudder.zip
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! --
|