Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:06 AM - Re: Who made the parts (James E. Lanier)
2. 03:02 AM - Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron (Martin Pohl)
3. 04:18 AM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (Paul Mulwitz)
4. 04:19 AM - Re: Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron (David Downey)
5. 04:41 AM - Re: New Project Problems (ashontz)
6. 04:46 AM - Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (ashontz)
7. 06:35 AM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Juan Vega)
8. 06:47 AM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Jay Maynard)
9. 07:11 AM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Cndmovn)
10. 07:40 AM - Re: Va Defined (Bryan Martin)
11. 07:53 AM - AS5 Part Number? (Stainless Steel A5 Rivets) (PatrickW)
12. 09:08 AM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Andrewlieser)
13. 09:17 AM - Re: Who made the parts (Jim McBurney)
14. 09:20 AM - The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (LarryMcFarland)
15. 09:59 AM - Pre assembled corvair engine? (Andrewlieser)
16. 10:10 AM - Re: AS5 Part Number? (Stainless Steel A5 Rivets) (Terry Phillips)
17. 10:23 AM - Re: Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron (george may)
18. 10:38 AM - Re: Pre assembled corvair engine? (Ron Culver)
19. 10:39 AM - Re: Re: New Project Problems (Craig Payne)
20. 10:53 AM - Re: Pre assembled corvair engine? (Craig Payne)
21. 11:00 AM - Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (cookwithgas)
22. 11:27 AM - 701 First Flight (Dan)
23. 11:55 AM - Re: Re: New Project Problems (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
24. 12:14 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (David Downey)
25. 12:27 PM - Re: Re: New Project Problems (Craig Payne)
26. 12:33 PM - Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (William Dominguez)
27. 12:43 PM - Re: AS5 Part Number? (Stainless Steel A5 Rivets) (Ron Lendon)
28. 12:46 PM - Re: 701 First Flight (Leo Gates)
29. 01:04 PM - Re: Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Southern Reflections)
30. 01:48 PM - Re: Flying Music (kmccune)
31. 02:01 PM - Re: Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Juan Vega)
32. 02:01 PM - Re: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (Juan Vega)
33. 02:03 PM - Re: 701 First Flight (Juan Vega)
34. 02:04 PM - First fly (Lopes)
35. 02:08 PM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Juan Vega)
36. 02:42 PM - Re: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (wade jones)
37. 02:52 PM - Re: First fly (Craig Payne)
38. 02:55 PM - Four New Email Lists At Matronics!! (Matt Dralle)
39. 02:58 PM - Please provide appropriate subject lines!!! (Michael Valentine)
40. 03:04 PM - Re: 701 First Flight (George Race)
41. 03:15 PM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Southern Reflections)
42. 03:27 PM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Juan Vega)
43. 03:27 PM - Re: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (Juan Vega)
44. 04:14 PM - Jabiru 2200 Air Ducts (George Race)
45. 04:25 PM - Re: Four New Email Lists At Matronics!! (John Short)
46. 04:26 PM - Re: Jabiru 2200 Air Ducts (IFLYSMODEL@aol.com)
47. 04:35 PM - Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (cookwithgas)
48. 04:56 PM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Southern Reflections)
49. 05:14 PM - Re: Va Defined (n801bh@netzero.com)
50. 05:34 PM - Re: Re: New Project Problems (n801bh@netzero.com)
51. 05:35 PM - Re: 701 First Flight (n801bh@netzero.com)
52. 05:59 PM - Re: Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link (John Reinking)
53. 06:29 PM - FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (GLJSOJ1)
54. 06:49 PM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (Southern Reflections)
55. 06:50 PM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (Jeyoung65@aol.com)
56. 06:53 PM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (george may)
57. 07:21 PM - Re: Re: New Project Problems (Ronald Steele)
58. 07:55 PM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Jay Maynard)
59. 08:01 PM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (ihab.awad@gmail.com)
60. 08:38 PM - Re: First fly (Ron Lendon)
61. 09:04 PM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (Terry Phillips)
62. 09:53 PM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (Andrewlieser)
63. 10:05 PM - Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus (PLAV8R)
64. 10:05 PM - Zenith Builders Analysis Group (Terry Phillips)
65. 11:57 PM - Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (Craig Payne)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Who made the parts |
DO NOT ARCHIVE
sorry... should have said bent rudder skin in package
http://www.chemroc.com/CH601/rudder.zip
Jim
James E. Lanier wrote:
> <jim.lanier@charter.net>
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> "Crushed wing tip in crate with do damage to crate "
>
>
> Mine also. See photos:
>
> http://www.chemroc.com/CH601/rudder.zip
>
>
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: | Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron |
Hi Don & George
Just for confirmation: The LEADING upper edge of the flaps is approx. 3-4 mm (0,15
inch) higher than the trailing upper edge of the wing (at the rear spar, piano
hinge is a the bottom of the wing).
The TRAILING edge of the flaps should be at the same position as that of the ailerons.
If the flap's trailing edge is positioned higher than that of the ailerons,
a stall could develop first at the wing tip rather than at the wing root,
leading to uncontrolled quick movements of the plane around the longitudinal
axis.
Could please somebody confirm (or disprove) my thoughts.
Cheers Martin
--------
Martin Pohl
Zodiac XL QBK
8645 Jona, Switzerland
www.pohltec.ch/ZodiacXL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179302#179302
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 |
At 07:27 AM 4/24/2008, you wrote:
>Okkay...so what else would explain the results we see?
>--
One thing which has happened in the past is "Resonant
Oscillations". This is the story I heard about Lockheed Electra in
flight breakups.
When a resonant oscillation occurs, the vibration keeps growing in
amplitude until the whole thing breaks. That is where the resonance
comes in. In a non-resonant vibration, the vibration is "Damped"
which means it naturally reduces until it goes away.
One version of the Electra story I heard (alas, there have been
several conflicting stories) was that there was a resonant vibration
in the fuselage. On rare occasions the planes would simply break
apart in flight. The story ends with some brilliant detective work
and a simple change to the structure that eliminated the resonance.
Bill's story of persistent vibrations flying over the power plant
sounds like this kind of problem. By changing his flight conditions
he got the vibration to stop and the problem was over. If this
problem stems from the basic XL design, then perhaps other planes
have found the unfortunate formula for getting this resonant event started.
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron |
I agree. I was going to post a reply but got buried and forgot.
Hi Don & George
Just for confirmation: The LEADING upper edge of the flaps is approx. 3-4 mm (0,15
inch) higher than the trailing upper edge of the wing (at the rear spar, piano
hinge is a the bottom of the wing).
The TRAILING edge of the flaps should be at the same position as that of the ailerons.
If the flap's trailing edge is positioned higher than that of the ailerons,
a stall could develop first at the wing tip rather than at the wing root,
leading to uncontrolled quick movements of the plane around the longitudinal
axis.
Could please somebody confirm (or disprove) my thoughts.
Cheers Martin
--------
Martin Pohl
Zodiac XL QBK
8645 Jona, Switzerland
www.pohltec.ch/ZodiacXL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179302#179302
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: New Project Problems |
I don't think I'd open the holes to 3/8. The spar caps (the 1/4 x 1.5inch bar)
is already pretty close to minimum edge distance, even with the 5/16 bolts.
When I drilled my center spar to spar clamped everything together and first went
in with a small hole and an alignment bolt, then another alignment bolt, then
another small alignment bolt etc... then started opening up each hole and reaming.
Took a few hours, but all the reamed holes line up nicely.
do not archive
craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:
> 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
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179307#179307
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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
That being another possibility, then I would suspect that engine type, prop type,
and engine rpm could also contribute. The airframe may be just fine, the engine
installation/choice might not, unless the wing/fuselage combo has some odd
resonant frequency.
psm(at)att.net wrote:
> At 07:27 AM 4/24/2008, you wrote:
>
>
> > Okkay...so what else would explain the results we see?
> > --
> >
> >
>
> One thing which has happened in the past is "Resonant
> Oscillations". This is the story I heard about Lockheed Electra in
> flight breakups.
>
> When a resonant oscillation occurs, the vibration keeps growing in
> amplitude until the whole thing breaks. That is where the resonance
> comes in. In a non-resonant vibration, the vibration is "Damped"
> which means it naturally reduces until it goes away.
>
> One version of the Electra story I heard (alas, there have been
> several conflicting stories) was that there was a resonant vibration
> in the fuselage. On rare occasions the planes would simply break
> apart in flight. The story ends with some brilliant detective work
> and a simple change to the structure that eliminated the resonance.
>
> Bill's story of persistent vibrations flying over the power plant
> sounds like this kind of problem. By changing his flight conditions
> he got the vibration to stop and the problem was over. If this
> problem stems from the basic XL design, then perhaps other planes
> have found the unfortunate formula for getting this resonant event started.
>
> Paul
> XL fuselage
> do not archive
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179308#179308
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: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
the A 300 lost its rudder because it was made of carbon fiber support that failed
from a prior damage. what people do not know is that Aircraft had rudder damage
and was then repaired and put on the flight line. That led to the crash.
nothing else. the root spar gave way with rudder deflection due to prior damage
fatiguing it.
Lets quit comparing a small Zenith aircraft to a 10 ton Jet. Lets get back to
building the planes please, you guys are mentally mastubating all over the place..
The plane in Polk CIty was a production plane so the NTSB will do a full
investigation and we will eventually see where the results lie. Everything else
is armchair sleuthing which leads to bad and misleading speculation. LETS
MOVE ON PLEASE.
Don't bother to rebuttle unless you have built one and are flying one. i am getting
tired of the cackle of hens bitching and speculating, and most are a decade
away from flying, or not even building! This is NOT the NTSB investigation
Matronics Web Site! MOVE ON!
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: "n801bh@netzero.com" <n801bh@netzero.com>
>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 12:16 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Va Defined
>
>That is the perfect example of how VA is not a "get out of jail free" pass....
>
>
>Ben Haas
>N801BH
>www.haaspowerair.com
>
>-- Jimbo <jimandmandy@yahoo.com> wrote:
>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 ====================================================================================================================================================
>_____________________________________________________________
>Let your voice be heard! Click here and get paid to participate in surveys!
>http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4s0OscL8JtEmXXdGsylvWkxF1X2i3DFHYlPkAWg7qqeKL37c/
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 09:27:35AM -0400, Juan Vega wrote:
> Don't bother to rebuttle unless you have built one and are flying one. i
> am getting tired of the cackle of hens bitching and speculating, and most
> are a decade away from flying, or not even building! This is NOT the NTSB
> investigation Matronics Web Site! MOVE ON!
Sorry, Juan, but I have to disagree on this one. The prospect of an inflight
breakup is enough to give any pilot pause. The people on this list (at least
the Zodiac contingent) have a real interest in whether or not it will happen
to them, and unique insight into how the aircraft goes together and what
goes into it.
I'm not building. I'm buying. I want to know if it's going to kill me, and
how to prevent it if there's any way I can. That's not going to stop me from
getting in and flying it, but it may well affect how I fly it.
--
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)
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: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Well said! I have kept my mouth shut on this for the past week and just hit
the delete key every time it came up.
Back to building everyone.
I am about to hang the front sides on my fuselage. A bit of a b@tch getting
the firewall and everything lined up, but I think I have it.
Cheers
Paul
www.mykitlog.com/paulried
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>
> the A 300 lost its rudder because it was made of carbon fiber support that
> failed from a prior damage. what people do not know is that Aircraft had
> rudder damage and was then repaired and put on the flight line. That led to
> the crash. nothing else. the root spar gave way with rudder deflection due
> to prior damage fatiguing it.
>
> Lets quit comparing a small Zenith aircraft to a 10 ton Jet. Lets get
> back to building the planes please, you guys are mentally mastubating all
> over the place.. The plane in Polk CIty was a production plane so the NTSB
> will do a full investigation and we will eventually see where the results
> lie. Everything else is armchair sleuthing which leads to bad and
> misleading speculation. LETS MOVE ON PLEASE.
> Don't bother to rebuttle unless you have built one and are flying one. i
> am getting tired of the cackle of hens bitching and speculating, and most
> are a decade away from flying, or not even building! This is NOT the NTSB
> investigation Matronics Web Site! MOVE ON!
>
> Juan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: "n801bh@netzero.com" <n801bh@netzero.com>
> >Sent: Apr 26, 2008 12:16 AM
> >To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Va Defined
> >
> >That is the perfect example of how VA is not a "get out of jail free"
> pass....
> >
> >
> >Ben Haas
> >N801BH
> >www.haaspowerair.com
> >
> >-- Jimbo <jimandmandy@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >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.
> >
> >Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net> wrote:--> Zenith-List message
> posted by: "Gig Giacona"
> >
> >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
> ====================================================================================================================================================
> >_____________________________________________________________
> >Let your voice be heard! Click here and get paid to participate in
> surveys!
> >
> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4s0OscL8JtEmXXdGsylvWkxF1X2i3DFHYlPkAWg7qqeKL37c/
>
>
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 |
|
Va means that the wing will stall before it exceeds its positive G
flight load limit when encountering a certain maximum level of
turbulence or when subjected to a certain maximum control input rate
or a combination of the two. It doesn't mean you won't break the
airplane while flying below Va if you fly into a severe thunderstorm
or suddenly slam the stick to its rear limit.
In certificated aircraft, Va is defined for a particular set of
conditions and control inputs and it also deals with he vertical and
horizontal stabilizers and not just the wing . Even when flying below
Va, you can break the airplane if you command control inputs that
exceed the certification standards or if turbulence conditions exceed
what the airplane was certificated to handle.
If you aren't flying in an aircraft that was designed for aerobatic
flight, making abrupt maximum control inputs is not a recommended
practice at any speed.
On Apr 26, 2008, at 12:16 AM, n801bh@netzero.com wrote:
> That is the perfect example of how VA is not a "get out of jail
> free" pass....
>
>
> Ben Haas
> N801BH
> www.haaspowerair.com
>
> -- Jimbo <jimandmandy@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 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.
>
> Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>
> 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
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
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: | AS5 Part Number? (Stainless Steel A5 Rivets) |
Anybody know the actual part number for the Stainless Steel A5 rivets referred
to as "AS5" rivets in the plans...?
I've searched the archives with no luck.
Thanks,
Patrick
XL/Corvair
N63PZ (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179331#179331
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: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Juan your facts on the airbus crash are a bit misleading.... I was required to
do a 6 mo. investigation on this particular accident in my air traffic training
because of the roll wake turbulence had. All of what you said does have truth
to it however the biggest contributing factor leading to the failure of that
part was the over deflection of the rudder during the wake turbulence encounter.
The speed at which full rudder deflection can be applied was not exceeded
in this event however that speed is designed for application of full deflection
in 1 direction OR the other from the neutral position NOT from 1 direction
TO the other as was the case with the airbus. Believe it or not this is actually
how the AAL pilots where trained to handle this encounter in the A300.
AAL had removed certain elements from the simulator program provided by airbus
that would have caught this mistake early on. So while I agree we should not
compare Airbus' to Oranges we would be ignorant not too learn from accidents
facts that could one day save our lives. And in this instance it is important
to understand that overdeflection of a control surface at ANY speed can have
devastating consequences which is in fact related to some of the concerns we all
are trying to address right now.
--------
Andrew Lieser
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179339#179339
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: Who made the parts |
Maybe Zenith makes the kit, then subs out the "quick-build", i.e., the
subcontractor assembles the kit, then disassembles it (I was going to say
"knocks it down", but that doesn't seem right!) and packages it for the
quick-build customer. I know that my 801 non-qb kit was packed at Mexico,
MO, 'cause I saw it!
Blue skies and tailwinds
Jim
CH-801
DeltaHawk diesel
Augusta GA
90% done, 90% left
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: | The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
Hi guys,
Yesterday, my over zealous spam-protection ate a dozen emails that
were sent me on this issue, so Im going to try a blanket answer with a
do not archive that only reflects my view. If there was a specific
technical question on an item, please do not hesitate to resend your
email. Thanks again, Larry McFarland
Professionally, Ive only studied fatigue testing and failure on
mechanical and structural elements, so Im not qualified to make any
statements that could prove anything. That experience did provide
valuable insight on a few of the things seen in the images. After
reading the NTSB sequence of events, I put the images on my computer to
take an only slightly closer look via Photoshop, and did come to some
conclusions on the damage characteristics. NTSB may offer a general
statement, but the specific cause may never be answered in their report
unless they take time to thoroughly investigate manufacture process,
assembly errors and variant materials in the plane.
The observed leveling and low altitude suggests the pilot was aware of a
progressive structural failure.
Complete failure of the center section front spar between and below the
end points is telling. Bending stresses causing the center spar web and
caps to crack and separate along lines nearly parallel to it, given the
flight path, was progressive. Impact would not likely push or pull a
long fractured line in the same direction as the design stress, but the
length of center spar fracture and break up was so complete that it
suggests that the shock that permitted folding wing(s) began here.
The loss of a rear spar attachment and flap could very well create
excessive stress on the front spar, break the bottom caps, and initiate
collapse of the wing(s).
The clean sheared rivet lines on the bottom spar cap versus the material
that was last to tear from the top cap suggests that the web to cap line
was torn from between the spar caps before being separated from the
fuselage. Extensive separation of the center spar from top and bottom
components far exceeds the damage seen in the wing, still attached. The
fractures are not peeled and are parallel with the line of stress and
are seen in the straight portions of still connected web and upper cap
image 27. Broken out bolt holes are clean and likely impact related. The
origin of failure is nearer the front lower spar cap and web than within
the wing.
. The original still flying XL demo plane is representative of all the
XLs flying today and it strongly argues the case for a defective
material or construction process by the actual foreign manufacturer of
the quick-build or ready to fly aircraft. Its not the result of a
defective design material or process call out in the Zenith plans.
Example: If pre-punched holes for the spar web didnt match the caps,
would the manufacturer just drill open the holes and continue to rivet?
Very possible for people paid on product-volume, but I doubt a kit
builder or scratch builder would ever tolerate such practice.
I believe the plans to be golden and safe for both the kit and the
scratch builder. The 601XL is a fine aircraft that will be around for a
long time, so stay the course and keep on building.
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
<http://www.macsmachine.com/> Do not archive
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: | Pre assembled corvair engine? |
I was wondering if anybody here had talked to these guys or have bought one of their Corvair engines. Or what the differences were in this model versus the William Wynne version. Here is the link: http://www.venturay.com/engines.html
Just looking for a little light to be shed! Now back down to the shop!
Andy
--------
Andrew Lieser
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179346#179346
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: AS5 Part Number? (Stainless Steel A5 Rivets) |
Patrick
I ordered a couple of dozen extra AS5's from Zenith. And, the part no. as
shown on the invoice was (you guessed it)
AS5.
If you are looking for a non-ZAC source, you might consider Hanson Rivet Co.
http://www.hansonrivet.com/w17a.htm
I have purchased some 3/32" blind rivets from them and got prompt service
and a reasonable price. Their catalog is wonderful. It is amazing how many
different kinds of rivets are manufactured. However, there is no guarantee
that the rivets Hanson sells are of the same quality as those supplied by ZAC.
Terry
At 07:50 AM 4/26/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>Anybody know the actual part number for the Stainless Steel A5 rivets
>referred to as "AS5" rivets in the plans...?
>
>I've searched the archives with no luck.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Patrick
>XL/Corvair
>N63PZ (reserved)
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail, flaps, & ailerons
are done; working on the wings
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron |
Martin--
Page 6-W-00 (edition 12/01) indicates that the flap extends 3mm above th
e rear wing spar and 2-3mm below the bottom of the wing.
George
George> Subject: Zenith-List: Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron> Fr
om: mpohl@pohltec.ch> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 02:58:03 -0700> To: zenith-lis
pohltec.ch>> > Hi Don & George> > Just for confirmation: The LEADING upper
edge of the flaps is approx. 3-4 mm (0,15 inch) higher than the trailing up
per edge of the wing (at the rear spar, piano hinge is a the bottom of the
wing).> > The TRAILING edge of the flaps should be at the same position as
that of the ailerons. If the flap's trailing edge is positioned higher than
that of the ailerons, a stall could develop first at the wing tip rather t
han at the wing root, leading to uncontrolled quick movements of the plane
around the longitudinal axis.> > Could please somebody confirm (or disprove
) my thoughts.> > Cheers Martin> > --------> Martin Pohl> Zodiac XL QBK> 86
45 Jona, Switzerland> www.pohltec.ch/ZodiacXL> > > > > Read this topic onli
ne here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179302#179302> >
====> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Spell a grand slam in this game where word skill meets World Series. Get in
the game.
http://club.live.com/word_slugger.aspx?icid=word_slugger_wlhm_admod_april
08
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: Pre assembled corvair engine? |
Any weight data on this engine?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrewlieser" <Andrewlieser@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 12:56 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Pre assembled corvair engine?
>
> I was wondering if anybody here had talked to these guys or have bought
> one of their Corvair engines. Or what the differences were in this model
> versus the William Wynne version. Here is the link:
> http://www.venturay.com/engines.html
> Just looking for a little light to be shed! Now back down to the shop!
>
> Andy
>
> --------
> Andrew Lieser
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179346#179346
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Project Problems |
Unlike rivets there is no hard and fast edge-distance for a bolt. The
factory has agreed that in principal that the hole can be upsized.
Going from 5/16th to 3/8th is an increase of 1/16th. The edges of the hole
will move half that or 1/32nd which is 31.25 thou. I'm comfortable with
loosing that much metal. Note that I would only have to do this to 4 of the
12 holes.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ashontz
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 5:37 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: New Project Problems
I don't think I'd open the holes to 3/8. The spar caps (the 1/4 x 1.5inch
bar) is already pretty close to minimum edge distance, even with the 5/16
bolts.
When I drilled my center spar to spar clamped everything together and first
went in with a small hole and an alignment bolt, then another alignment
bolt, then another small alignment bolt etc... then started opening up each
hole and reaming. Took a few hours, but all the reamed holes line up nicely.
do not archive
craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:
> 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
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179307#179307
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: | Pre assembled corvair engine? |
Talk to William before you deal with these guys. He has his biases but what
he reported would keep me from dealing with this operation.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrewlieser
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 10:56 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Pre assembled corvair engine?
I was wondering if anybody here had talked to these guys or have bought one
of their Corvair engines. Or what the differences were in this model versus
the William Wynne version. Here is the link:
http://www.venturay.com/engines.html
Just looking for a little light to be shed! Now back down to the shop!
Andy
--------
Andrew Lieser
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179346#179346
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: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
Thanks Larry for your thoughtful input.
This morning I put just over an hour on my 601XL and felt very good about it.
It flies like a dream and I have to pinch myself because I can't believe I built
it and that it flies that well.
I did a more thorough than usual pre-flight and found everything to be solid and
tight. The design is good and all the hard work has paid off with a very nice
aircraft.
For those still building, don't be discouraged. Do quality work and you will have
a well-built, safe aircraft.
Scott Laughlin
601XL/Corvair
Finished & Flying as much as possible.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179356#179356
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: | 701 First Flight |
On Wednesday I journeyed over to Quality Sport Planes in Cloverdale for
a demo ride in their new 701. My pilot was Doug and he was terrific. I
got to make several takeoff and landings. Even though I was in the
right seat, with Doug's instruction it was great! All of the people at
Quality were very friendly and helpful. I got way more time in the
plane than I expected based on the small donation they requested for fuel.
This morning I took my new found knowledge and went to the airport, made
a very complete preflight and did some taxi practice. Doug mentioned
that I should taxi down the runway holding the nose wheel of the ground
as this is the attitude that the plane will be in for landing. I took
his suggestion and found it was quite easy to control while maintaining
about 3000 rpm. Once I got to the runway turnoff, I went back to the
start of 36, called my intentions and slowly accelerated. Before I went
much beyond 100 feet I was in the air and climbing. I flew once around
the pattern (forgot to call downwind and final in my excitement) and set
up for landing. The landing was easy and I taxied back to my tie down.
I decided not to take another flight today because the wind was picking
up and the thermals were making things bumpy for first flights. Also I
need to add about 1/2 degree to the pitch since my rpm's were a little high.
All in all a very successful morning. Now that the first flight is over
I can start my test flight regimen.
Keep building. Flying your own plane is a fantastic feeling!
Dan Wilde
Do not archive
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: New Project Problems |
Zenith told me that it isn't as much the bolt hole tolerance that is
critical but the clamping pressure of the bolt that is more important just like
the
prop. I haven't had any problems with the spars on 3 kits but will check my
spars and center section before I install it in the plane. I also fixed the
front gear problem by shifting the fork about 1/8 inch it doesn't look all the
professional but the wheel pant will cover it.
Jeff
_www.aeroliteproducts.com_ (http://www.aeroliteproducts.com)
_www.project601xl.com_ (http://www.project601xl.com)
Unlike rivets there is no hard and fast edge-distance for a bolt. The
factory has agreed that in principal that the hole can be upsized.
Going from 5/16th to 3/8th is an increase of 1/16th. The edges of the hole
will move half that or 1/32nd which is 31.25 thou. I'm comfortable with
loosing that much metal. Note that I would only have to do this to 4 of the
12 holes.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ashontz
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 5:37 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: New Project Problems
I don't think I'd open the holes to 3/8. The spar caps (the 1/4 x 1.5inch
bar) is already pretty close to minimum edge distance, even with the 5/16
bolts.
When I drilled my center spar to spar clamped everything together and first
went in with a small hole and an alignment bolt, then another alignment
bolt, then another small alignment bolt etc... then started opening up each
hole and reaming. Took a few hours, but all the reamed holes line up nicely.
do not archive
craig(at)craigandjean.com wrote:
> 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
>
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
**************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 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: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
do not archive
I believe that the Electra phenomena was "whirl mode"
At 07:27 AM 4/24/2008, you wrote:
>Okkay...so what else would explain the results we see?
>--
One thing which has happened in the past is "Resonant
Oscillations". This is the story I heard about Lockheed Electra in
flight breakups.
When a resonant oscillation occurs, the vibration keeps growing in
amplitude until the whole thing breaks. That is where the resonance
comes in. In a non-resonant vibration, the vibration is "Damped"
which means it naturally reduces until it goes away.
One version of the Electra story I heard (alas, there have been
several conflicting stories) was that there was a resonant vibration
in the fuselage. On rare occasions the planes would simply break
apart in flight. The story ends with some brilliant detective work
and a simple change to the structure that eliminated the resonance.
Bill's story of persistent vibrations flying over the power plant
sounds like this kind of problem. By changing his flight conditions
he got the vibration to stop and the problem was over. If this
problem stems from the basic XL design, then perhaps other planes
have found the unfortunate formula for getting this resonant event started.
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: New Project Problems |
> Zenith told me that it isn't as much the bolt hole tolerance that is
critical but the clamping pressure of the bolt that is more important just
like the prop.
They told me the same thing. But it is at odds with the requirement that the
holes be precision reamed. On an RV-7 the equivalent holes are burnished.
I've attached a close-up of a shot of Lance Gingell's RV-7a spar. He is
making great progress: http://lancegingell.blogspot.com/
BTW: the only way I have found to get an accurate measurement on the hole
sizes is to use plug gauges. I bought a set from Grizzly but Zenith has been
loaning a handful of gauges near the correct size to other builders to check
theirs.
-- Craig
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: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. |
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
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
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179367#179367
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: AS5 Part Number? (Stainless Steel A5 Rivets) |
I just called Zenith and they send out a dozen. I figure I'll have the right ones
that way.
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
Corvair Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179368#179368
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: 701 First Flight |
MEGAFANTASTIC!!!!! Let the fun begin.
--
Leo Gates
N601Z - CH601HDS TDO
Rotax 912UL
Dan wrote:
>
> I got to the runway turnoff, I went back to the start of 36, called my
> intentions and slowly accelerated. Before I went much beyond 100 feet
> I was in the air and climbing. I flew once around the pattern (forgot
> to call downwind and final in my excitement) and set up for landing.
> The landing was easy and I taxied back to my tie down.
> I decided not to take another flight today because the wind was
> picking up and the thermals were making things bumpy for first
> flights. Also I need to add about 1/2 degree to the pitch since my
> rpm's were a little high.
>
> All in all a very successful morning. Now that the first flight is
> over I can start my test flight regimen.
>
> Keep building. Flying your own plane is a fantastic feeling!
>
> Dan Wilde
>
> Do not archive
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: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Very well put Andrew, I hope that you have bult a 601 or at least stayed
at a" Holiday Inn " If not all of your education,and knowlege of Air
craft doesn't count for ZIP, If you don't belive me ask Juan....
N101HD 601XL/RAM (I built a 601, but don't know anything about a Airbus,can
you imagine that? -----
Original Message -----
From: "Andrewlieser" <Andrewlieser@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 12:04 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus
>
> Juan your facts on the airbus crash are a bit misleading.... I was
> required to do a 6 mo. investigation on this particular accident in my air
> traffic training because of the roll wake turbulence had. All of what you
> said does have truth to it however the biggest contributing factor leading
> to the failure of that part was the over deflection of the rudder during
> the wake turbulence encounter. The speed at which full rudder deflection
> can be applied was not exceeded in this event however that speed is
> designed for application of full deflection in 1 direction OR the other
> from the neutral position NOT from 1 direction TO the other as was the
> case with the airbus. Believe it or not this is actually how the AAL
> pilots where trained to handle this encounter in the A300. AAL had
> removed certain elements from the simulator program provided by airbus
> that would have caught this mistake early on. So while I agree we should
> not compare Airbus' to Oranges we would be ignorant not!
> too learn from accidents facts that could one day save our lives. And in
> this instance it is important to understand that overdeflection of a
> control surface at ANY speed can have devastating consequences which is in
> fact related to some of the concerns we all are trying to address right
> now.
>
> --------
> Andrew Lieser
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
>