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