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:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179339#179339
>
>
>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Flying Music |
Hey how did the snow turn out, We only got a dusting here(east and slightly north
of ST Paul) . This winter sure has been long!
Thanks for the music.
Do not archive
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that
you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179378#179378
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Andrew,
And you forgot to mention that the A 300 landed on its rudder and the carbon fiber
structure was never repaired properly. So what part is missleading? so we
are comparing a screwed up part on a 10 ton aircraft to a 700 lb. zenith. I
am glad you studied the case as an Airtraffic control school requirement. Lets
keep up the great Great comparisons. Apples and oranges.
Lets not kid our selves, we are building a "Kit" not designing an airbus. The
Kit which by luck was an S-SLA prodction plane crashed and every weekend engineer
wannabe is out being Inspector Cleuseau. It got old three days ago. Frankly
I feel pretty Bad for the families, I frankly have thought how bad it must
be, and We all put ourselves in that plane. But lets move on.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Southern Reflections <purplemoon99@bellsouth.net>
>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 3:58 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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>
>To: <zenith-list@matronics.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:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179339#179339
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
Righ ON! I just came back from flying and I as well am inspecting the plane throughout.
Scott please send more pics of your flying, I love those vids! Sorry
I missed you at the BBQ!
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: cookwithgas <cookwithgas@HOTMAIL.COM>
>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 1:57 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: 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 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 First Flight |
Congrads! After the knees stop shaking like mine did on the first flights, SEND
PICS!!!
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Leo Gates <leo@zuehlfield.com>
>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 3:44 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Hello,
Sorry, I don't speak english very well but I would like to say I am flying my
Zodiac a few days. Total 14 hours of fly.
Please take a look on:
http://br.youtube.com/watch?v=uL-gjfTiO1M
I am a very happy man!
--
Ricardo Volkweis Lopes
PU-VHQ - Zodiac 601 XL RB/TD - Kit rpido Airfox
Jabiru 3300 120HP, hlice bi-p Sensenich 64"
http://portal.ucpel.tche.br/py3vhq/home/Zodiac
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Jay,
Fair enough, lets agree to disagree, accident gave me pause and concerns as well,
but lets leave the investigation to the REAL Professionals and..............
LETS MOVE ON!
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 9:43 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
Hello all you newly licensed 601XL pilots . Did you use DARs or FAA ,if so
was any special inspection requirements imposed since 3/1/08 . My local DAR
said that he received information from the FAA that he must check to see if
any additional inspection requirements apply to the 601XL .
Wade Jones South Texas
601XL plans building
Cont. 0200
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft
>
> Righ ON! I just came back from flying and I as well am inspecting the
> plane throughout. Scott please send more pics of your flying, I love
> those vids! Sorry I missed you at the BBQ!
>
> Juan
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: cookwithgas <cookwithgas@HOTMAIL.COM>
>>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 1:57 PM
>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Zenith-List: 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 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Congratulations! Another beautiful XL out of Brazil.
-- Craig
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lopes
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 3:00 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: First fly
Hello,
Sorry, I don't speak english very well but I would like to say I am flying my
Zodiac a few days. Total 14 hours of fly.
Please take a look on:
http://br.youtube.com/watch?v=uL-gjfTiO1M
I am a very happy man!
--
Ricardo Volkweis Lopes
PU-VHQ - Zodiac 601 XL RB/TD - Kit rpido Airfox
Jabiru 3300 120HP, hlice bi-p Sensenich 64"
http://portal.ucpel.tche.br/py3vhq/home/Zodiac
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Four New Email Lists At Matronics!! |
Dear Listers,
I have added four new Lists to the Matronics line up today. These include the
following categories:
Citabria-List Citabria, Decathlon, Scout, and Champ
Zenith601-List Zenair Zodiac CH 601
Zenith640-List Zenair Zodiac CH 640
Zenith701801-List Zenair STOL CH 701 and CH 801
All services are enabled and now available including Search, Browse, Digest, Archives,
Forums, Chat, etc., etc. etc...:
Citabria:
http://www.matronics.com/navigator?citabria-list
Zenith601:
http://www.matronics.com/navigator?zenith601-list
Zenith640:
http://www.matronics.com/navigator?zenith640-list
Zenith701801:
http://www.matronics.com/navigator?zenith701801-list
To subscribe, go to the Matronics Email List Subscription Form:
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
To check the new Lists out on the Matronics Forum go here:
http://forums.matronics.com
Enjoy the new Lists!! Don't forget me during the Fund Raiser! :-)
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Please provide appropriate subject lines!!! |
Folks, many of us (I hope) are interested in keeping up on the useful
discussions surrounding the accident analysis. We are less interested in
reading everyone's back and forth about BBQs and DARs. So, please STOP
replying to everyone on the list without changing the subject line to an
accurate representation of your post. If you are changing the *subject* of
the post, change the *subject* *line* of the post!!!
Thank you, Michael in NH
do not archive
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 First Flight |
Fantastic Dan, hopefully the first of many more successful flights.
George
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
I think that you may be correct Juan," we should move on",but'that is not
to say when other people on the list want to talk about it, they should !
,and the other people that are not intrested, you're right,just hit the"
DELEAT "key".One thing that we all should agree on. We are dealing with ," a
unknown factor", a unknown factor is not a good thing to try solve because
there may be more than just one..that increases chances of something going
wrong around two fold." That to me is a long shot ",I dont play" long shots
", so my crate is staying on the ground !, untill some one finds out what is
going on. That's" just me ",any one else can fly you' re asses off ,that is
up to you.. Joe N101HD 601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 5:05 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: comparing a zenith to an airbus
>
> Jay,
> Fair enough, lets agree to disagree, accident gave me pause and concerns
> as well, but lets leave the investigation to the REAL Professionals
> and.............. LETS MOVE ON!
> Juan
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
>>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 9:43 AM
>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Southern,
My recommendation is then that you call Matronics and start the "Sh-t on Zenith
and armchair quarterbacking List". That way the guys that want to open their
crates and start building have a place to go for advise on "Building and Flying"
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Southern Reflections <purplemoon99@bellsouth.net>
>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 6:10 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: comparing a zenith to an airbus
>
>
>I think that you may be correct Juan," we should move on",but'that is not
>to say when other people on the list want to talk about it, they should !
>,and the other people that are not intrested, you're right,just hit the"
>DELEAT "key".One thing that we all should agree on. We are dealing with ," a
>unknown factor", a unknown factor is not a good thing to try solve because
>there may be more than just one..that increases chances of something going
>wrong around two fold." That to me is a long shot ",I dont play" long shots
>", so my crate is staying on the ground !, untill some one finds out what is
>going on. That's" just me ",any one else can fly you' re asses off ,that is
>up to you.. Joe N101HD 601XL/RAM
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
>To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>; <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 5:05 PM
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: comparing a zenith to an airbus
>
>
>>
>> Jay,
>> Fair enough, lets agree to disagree, accident gave me pause and concerns
>> as well, but lets leave the investigation to the REAL Professionals
>> and.............. LETS MOVE ON!
>> Juan
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>>From: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
>>>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 9:43 AM
>>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
Wade,
we went to a DAR, and my thoughts on your DAR's comment, Go to another DAR.
JUan
-----Original Message-----
>From: wade jones <wjones@brazoriainet.com>
>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 5:38 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft
>
>
>Hello all you newly licensed 601XL pilots . Did you use DARs or FAA ,if so
>was any special inspection requirements imposed since 3/1/08 . My local DAR
>said that he received information from the FAA that he must check to see if
>any additional inspection requirements apply to the 601XL .
>Wade Jones South Texas
>601XL plans building
>Cont. 0200
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
>To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>; <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 3:57 PM
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft
>
>
>>
>> Righ ON! I just came back from flying and I as well am inspecting the
>> plane throughout. Scott please send more pics of your flying, I love
>> those vids! Sorry I missed you at the BBQ!
>>
>> Juan
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>>From: cookwithgas <cookwithgas@HOTMAIL.COM>
>>>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 1:57 PM
>>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>>Subject: Zenith-List: 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 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Jabiru 2200 Air Ducts |
I am at the point where I am ready to install the fiberglass air ducts
supplied by Jabiru USA in my FWF kit.
Has anyone out there done this?
In reading the instructions and information it says that the fixed divider
in the duct should fall between the spark plugs. I notice that there is a
gap between the heads and wonder if that is where the divider/deflector
should be falling. Mine, on both sides, falls between the rear cylinder
spark plugs on both sides.
It appears that in this location, I am going to need to remove most of the
divider/deflector.
As it was factory installed I am wondering where I am going wrong.
Any suggestions greatly appreciated.
George
CH701 N73EX (Reserved)
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Four New Email Lists At Matronics!! |
Thank god I'm so sick of reading about all the BS except building and flying
I could shoot myself in the foot I think it would be better.
Thanks Matt
John (Scratch building 701)
Kaufman, Tx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Dralle" <dralle@matronics.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 4:52 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Four New Email Lists At Matronics!!
>
> Dear Listers,
>
> I have added four new Lists to the Matronics line up today. These include
> the following categories:
>
> Citabria-List Citabria, Decathlon, Scout, and Champ
>
> Zenith601-List Zenair Zodiac CH 601
>
> Zenith640-List Zenair Zodiac CH 640
>
> Zenith701801-List Zenair STOL CH 701 and CH 801
>
>
> All services are enabled and now available including Search, Browse,
> Digest, Archives, Forums, Chat, etc., etc. etc...:
>
> Citabria:
> http://www.matronics.com/navigator?citabria-list
>
> Zenith601:
> http://www.matronics.com/navigator?zenith601-list
>
> Zenith640:
> http://www.matronics.com/navigator?zenith640-list
>
> Zenith701801:
> http://www.matronics.com/navigator?zenith701801-list
>
>
> To subscribe, go to the Matronics Email List Subscription Form:
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
>
>
> To check the new Lists out on the Matronics Forum go here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> Enjoy the new Lists!! Don't forget me during the Fund Raiser! :-)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Matt Dralle
> Matronics Email List Administrator
>
>
>
Message 46
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru 2200 Air Ducts |
Hey George: I have not done it on a 2200, but on my 3300, I had to make
quite a cut on the rear divider to enable the ducts to fit properly. I also had
to add (smaller) dividers over each of the other cylinders to get the proper
cooling on my 3300 powered 601 HD.
Lynn Nelsen
**************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 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
I used the FAA. LOOONG wait and very picky. My inspector told me that if I flew
with my ever-so-slightly-slanted N-numbers that he would write me up. Never
mind that I bought them from Aircraft Spruce specially made. His interpretation
of "block letters" is plumb vertical with no slant. While he was there he
did a ramp inspection on a crop duster and busted him.
I sent my paperwork off in May and I got my pink slip in December, 2007.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179474#179474
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Juan; you don't get it,do you ? It's not about you, or zenith it's about
what I'am going to do with my airplane,and as far as" shit on zenith part"
you got that 1/2 right. as usual, I don't give a shit what you or zenith
do. Do you owe them because they sold you a kit., I know I don't..Keep on
flying well in formed.601 builder Joe N101HD601XL/RAM
what you or zenith
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: comparing a zenith to an airbus
>
> Southern,
> My recommendation is then that you call Matronics and start the "Sh-t on
> Zenith and armchair quarterbacking List". That way the guys that want to
> open their crates and start building have a place to go for advise on
> "Building and Flying"
>
> Juan
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Southern Reflections <purplemoon99@bellsouth.net>
>>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 6:10 PM
>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: comparing a zenith to an airbus
>>
>><purplemoon99@bellsouth.net>
>>
>>I think that you may be correct Juan," we should move on",but'that is not
>>to say when other people on the list want to talk about it, they should !
>>,and the other people that are not intrested, you're right,just hit the"
>>DELEAT "key".One thing that we all should agree on. We are dealing with ,"
>>a
>>unknown factor", a unknown factor is not a good thing to try solve
>>because
>>there may be more than just one..that increases chances of something
>>going
>>wrong around two fold." That to me is a long shot ",I dont play" long
>>shots
>>", so my crate is staying on the ground !, untill some one finds out what
>>is
>>going on. That's" just me ",any one else can fly you' re asses off ,that
>>is
>>up to you.. Joe N101HD 601XL/RAM
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
>>To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>; <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>>Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 5:05 PM
>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: comparing a zenith to an airbus
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Jay,
>>> Fair enough, lets agree to disagree, accident gave me pause and concerns
>>> as well, but lets leave the investigation to the REAL Professionals
>>> and.............. LETS MOVE ON!
>>> Juan
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
>>>>Sent: Apr 26, 2008 9:43 AM
>>>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
That was exactly my point,,, The black box clearly showed the co pilot f
ully deflected the rudder three times in 5 seconds, that broke the poor
thing off. Juan's comment was to ignore that fact and just move on. We
ll, if next week there is a crash of a Zenith and a fatality in Mexico
I will just post... " Don't worry guys, just move on,to hell with Juans
guts spread over two acres""....
do not archive
n Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net> wrote:
Va means that the wing will stall before it exceeds its positive G fligh
t 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 be
low 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 conditio
ns 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 b
reak the airplane if you command control inputs that exceed the certific
ation 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 flig
ht, making abrupt maximum control inputs is not a recommended practice a
t any speed.
On Apr 26, 2008, at 12:16 AM, n801bh@netzero.com wrote:That is the perfe
ct 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 repo
rt.
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAR0404.pdf
American 587, an Airbus A-300 that lost its vertical stabilizer due to f
ull rudder deflections BELOW Va on a certified aircraft. I was working w
ith a team redesigning some structure on the B-777 vertical at the time
and we had a lot of discussion about this accident.
Gig Giacona <wr.giacona@suddenlink.net> wrote: --> Zenith-List message p
osted by: "Gig Giacona"
VA is defined as the speed at which a full control deflection can be mad
e abruptly and the aircraft will stall before any damage results to the
airframe.
Chris H has given us a fix that will reduce the amount of elevator defle
ction available. So even though there is no evidence that Sub VA flight
has
-- Bryan MartinN61BM, CH 601 XL,RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
===
_____________________________________________________________
Explore the great earning potential that comes with an insurance job. Cl
ick now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4tyGB2Y3MhIWLXszLUR
ic4iGIIOffeJzOH1E6MeCnCno0UMS/
Message 50
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Project Problems |
The forces acting on that joint are in shear, not tension. A reamed hole
is critical. Period!!!!
do not archive
> Zenith told me that it isn't as much the bolt hole tolerance that is c
ritical but the clamping pressure of the bolt that is more important jus
t like the prop.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microso
ft-com:office:office" />
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 burn
ished. I=92ve attached a close-up of a shot of Lance Gingell=92s RV-7a s
par. He is making great progress: http://lancegingell.blogspot.com/
BTW: the only way I have found to get an accurate measurement on the hol
e sizes is to use plug gauges. I bought a set from Grizzly but Zenith ha
s been loaning a handful of gauges near the correct size to other builde
rs to check theirs.
-- Craig
_____________________________________________________________
Prepare for the unexpected. Click now to prepare a living trust.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4tFu4ocgOCfRKhlYkj1
yAtOR52JrXQfKa2BOX8dqxmt3hZpw/
Message 51
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 First Flight |
Congrats !!!!
do not archive
r.com
-- Dan <dwilde@clearwire.net> wrote:
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 fue
l.
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 h
igh.
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
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
_____________________________________________________________
Click now to embark on a successful customer service career!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4ufws4qkR3sUsuKG816
G7xrhoZkveyvThsdBmTRzxuph8dgG/
Message 52
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CH601 Yuba City Photos Link |
Has anyone else been unable to access the NTSB link on this message?
Message 53
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
Hi All
I am just finishing up my 601XL with a O-200 engine from a Cessna 150. This engine
does not have a mechanical fuel pump, so I have installed two electric fuel
pumps, with separate electrical lines. Here's my nagging problem. If I lose
the electrics in the plane I will have no fuel pressure. How would some of
you handle this possible problem? When I have the engine overhauled in a few
years I plan to put a mechanical pump on it, but till then?
--------
601XL N676L reserved
ALMOST DONE
CHESAPEAKE VA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179494#179494
Message 54
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
Back-up batt.,with it's own switch and circuit.. Joe N101HD 601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: "GLJSOJ1" <gljno10@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 9:25 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION
>
> Hi All
>
> I am just finishing up my 601XL with a O-200 engine from a Cessna 150.
> This engine does not have a mechanical fuel pump, so I have installed two
> electric fuel pumps, with separate electrical lines. Here's my nagging
> problem. If I lose the electrics in the plane I will have no fuel
> pressure. How would some of you handle this possible problem? When I
> have the engine overhauled in a few years I plan to put a mechanical pump
> on it, but till then?
>
> --------
> 601XL N676L reserved
> ALMOST DONE
> CHESAPEAKE VA
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179494#179494
>
>
>
Message 55
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
You could add another battery and allow the aircraft elect. system to only
charge the battery and have only the fuel pumps connected to this battery with
a special switch when you lost aircraft elect power. This would be over
design!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you are worried about this you may
just installed a three way switch for each pump (ON to aircraft system) (On to
battery) and OFF. Jerry of GA DO NOT ARCHIVE
In a message dated 4/26/2008 9:30:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
gljno10@HOTMAIL.COM writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "GLJSOJ1" <gljno10@hotmail.com>
Hi All
I am just finishing up my 601XL with a O-200 engine from a Cessna 150. This
engine does not have a mechanical fuel pump, so I have installed two
electric fuel pumps, with separate electrical lines. Here's my nagging problem.
If
I lose the electrics in the plane I will have no fuel pressure. How would
some of you handle this possible problem? When I have the engine overhauled
in a few years I plan to put a mechanical pump on it, but till then?
--------
601XL N676L reserved
ALMOST DONE
CHESAPEAKE VA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179494#179494
**************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 56
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
I'd insure one pump is feed directly from your battery(fused appropriately)
, while the other can run off of your electrical distribution buss. Typical
ly loosing electrics implies loss of alternator. The battery will usually l
ast about 1/2 hour with essentials. That should be enough to get you safey
on the ground using the pump directly feeding off the battery.
George May
601XL 912s> Subject: Zenith-List: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION> From: gljno10@HOTMA
IL.COM> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 18:25:56 -0700> To: zenith-list@matronics.co
Hi All> > I am just finishing up my 601XL with a O-200 engine from a Cessna
150. This engine does not have a mechanical fuel pump, so I have installed
two electric fuel pumps, with separate electrical lines. Here's my nagging
problem. If I lose the electrics in the plane I will have no fuel pressure
. How would some of you handle this possible problem? When I have the engin
e overhauled in a few years I plan to put a mechanical pump on it, but till
then?> > --------> 601XL N676L reserved> ALMOST DONE> CHESAPEAKE VA> > > >
> Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.ph
=============> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself wherever you are. Mobilize!
http://www.gowindowslive.com/Mobile/Landing/Messenger/Default.aspx?Locale
=en-US?ocid=TAG_APRIL
Message 57
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Project Problems |
Coming from a structures background, this seems completely backward,
so I googled a bit and found that for aerospace applications, bolted
connections are usually designed with bolts in shear - a no-no for
structures. I'm a curious as to why. All the web pages I found that
might talk about this require a membership. Could you educate the
group a bit on why aerospace connections rely on shear rather than
clamping pressure, the norm for most applications?
do not archive
Ron
On Apr 27, 2008, at 12:28 AM, n801bh@netzero.com wrote:
> The forces acting on that joint are in shear, not tension. A reamed
> hole is critical. Period!!!!
>
>
> do not archive
>
>
> > 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=92ve attached a close-up of a shot of Lance
> Gingell=92s 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
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Prepare for the unexpected. Click now to prepare a living trust.
>
>
Message 58
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 06:23:28PM -0400, Juan Vega wrote:
> My recommendation is then that you call Matronics and start the "Sh-t on
> Zenith and armchair quarterbacking List".
OBJECTION!!!!!!
It is in no way my intention, nor, I believe, that of anyone here, to ****
on Zenith. They're good people making fine aircraft, and I'm certain they
are as heartsick as the rest of us over the loss of life. I do not believe
they're covering up a thing. I don't believe they *want* to cover up a
thing.
Those of us looking for answers to the 601XL mystery are not blaming anyone.
We just want answers, and, I believe, are entitled to them. We understand
that the NTSB takes a while to produce those answers. That those of us who
are experienced int he design and construction of the Zodiac are looking for
those answers ourselves is not a reflection on Zenith or anyone else. It's
merely a desire to know, sooner rather than later, just what the aircraft
might have in store for us.
--
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 59
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
For what it's worth --
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net> wrote:
>... lets leave the investigation to the REAL Professionals ...
The discussions I've seen on this list in the days since the "Post
crash" photo collection was published are as erudite and well-informed
as anything I've read in an NTSB accident report of a commercial heavy
(TWA 800, Egyptair 990, ...). It seems that, once the participants had
some concrete objective evidence, the (perfectly understandable!!)
paralyzing anxiety has been replaced by a real spirit of open debate
and inquiry. And many list members who stepped up to the plate clearly
have a lot of knowledge and experience to bring to bear.
Sincere condolences to those who knew the folks that were lost, and I
wish all the best of luck to those working to make sense of the
situation.
Ihab
DO NOT ARCHIVE
--
Ihab A.B. Awad, Palo Alto, CA
Message 60
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Congratulations, sure do like the shape of those Brazilian XL's.
do not archive
--------
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=179518#179518
Message 61
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
I would suggest that you adopt the philosophy advocated by Electric Bob of
the Aeroelectric Connection. IIRC, Bob's basic premise is that you should
wire your airplane so that the failure of the alternator will not result in
a life threatening situation. Consider his schematic Z-xx.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Misc_PDF/Zxx.pdf
Notice that there is an endurance bus. The endurance bus should only power
electrical loads that are necessary for survival. In Z-xx, the endurance
bus powers the GPS, transponder, NAV/COM, turn coordinator, intercom, and
the fuel boost pumps. During normal operation, the endurance bus is powered
by the alternator through a diode. In the event of an alternator failure,
the pilot manually throws a switch to power the endurance bus from the
battery. The diode blocks the power from flowing backwards to the main
power bus.
The idea is that you size your battery to provide however many minutes you
believe you will need to land in the event of an alternator failure. Let's
say the total load on the endurance bus is 15 amps. If you install, e.g.,
an Odyssey 925 battery, the advertised capacity is 50 minutes with a 25 amp
load. Since your endurance bus only draws 15 amps, you should be able to
fly for ~83 minutes while you look for a place to land. Hopefully, with
your GPS you would not have too much trouble flying to a suitable airport
in 83 minutes. If you decide that you don't need your NAV/COM or turn
coordinator while you are en route to the airport, you could switch those
off until you get close to the airport and, thereby, increase your endurance.
Finally, you say your are doing, the two fuel boost pumps on separate
circuits and fuses so that a short in one pump's power circuit would not
disable the other pump.
I'm a long way from doing that wiring myself, but Electric Bob's approach
makes good sense to me. My Jabiru engine has a mechanical pump, but I am
still putting a boost pump (and gascolator) in each wing.
Terry
At 06:25 PM 4/26/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi All
>
>I am just finishing up my 601XL with a O-200 engine from a Cessna
>150. This engine does not have a mechanical fuel pump, so I have
>installed two electric fuel pumps, with separate electrical lines. Here's
>my nagging problem. If I lose the electrics in the plane I will have no
>fuel pressure. How would some of you handle this possible problem? When
>I have the engine overhauled in a few years I plan to put a mechanical
>pump on it, but till then?
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 62
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Jay I agree whole heartedly with everything you said, I don't believe that Zenith
is trying to cover anything up either. And Juan I was not trying discredit
anything you've said I was instead just trying to put all the information out
there for people to discern. This is not a **** on Zenith debate at all, just
concerned builders trying to understand what has happened. Didn't mean to offend
anyone.... and yes I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!
Andrew
--------
Andrew Lieser
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179528#179528
Message 63
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: comparing a zenith to an airbus |
Juan,
Yes, lets get on with it. I am very sorry if someone took my postings as being
negative to Zenith or any of the fine members of this forum. I again say,
don't stop building, purchasing, or flying the Zodiac 601 XL. It is a dream aircraft
as you all know. I have the up-most respect for Chis Heinz and Zodiac.
It is obvious to me that these are men of integrity and are very committed
to their design, product, customers, and reputation. I would also feel that
with the information provided, builders may pay more attention to any changes
or recommendations based on the information that is available to them. Pilots
should practice due diligence prior to flight. Take a little extra time checking
for any "smoking" rivets in the undercarriage, inspecting the wing attachment
fittings ( if possible), aileron hinges etc. It would take less time then
this posting.
I am also sure that they (Zenith), along with the NTSB, are doing a thorough
investigation of these incidents. They may have seen many of these posts. I
do have faith in the NTSB and anyone associated with this aircraft. I have been
waiting one and a half years to hear some kind of conclusion to this accident.
The NTSB could very well be taxed of limited resources for investigations.
The NTSB could look at this forum and say "been there, seen that". However,
with what I have seen, there are many very conscientious members with an intimate
knowledge of the design and components and have come up with some very sound
theories based on a very limited amount of information (videos and a few
pictures). There are more eyes on this now. Someone may see something that others
have not seen (thinking outside the box).
I would consider the "armchair quarterbacks" as someone that has not participated
in the game. The game is still in play. There is no definite outcome yet.
But these fine people may very well have participated and/or have aided in
the resolution to problem that plagued us all.
Please don't stop building your dreams. This will all get figured out and we
can all feel at ease.
I am still waiting to hear if I can get access to the "Yuba City" aircraft and
procure better pictures, etc.
Regards, 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=179531#179531
Message 64
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
At 02:24 PM 4/25/2008 -0500, John Bolding wrote:
>Jeff,
>No deviation from my feeble point of view.
>
>...
>
>Progress is slow on the engineering front, I'm gonna call Thurston and see
>if he's interested in the project in case the academic doesn't pan out. He
>may want something useful to do in his spare time.
>Ya'll choose up a point man so if somebody says they are ready to do it
>there won't be any fumbling around. I think it needs to be a 601 guy in
>the middle of this as there might be some back and forth.
Progress is indeed slow. However, there is some that I can report.
Apparently it is finals time at Embry-Riddle, so the profs are pretty busy.
I have sent them links to the Yuba City photos, as well as, scans of
several of my wing drawings. We have tentatively arranged a phone call on
Thursday, May 1 to discuss the engineering evaluation of the 601XL wing. In
preparation for that call, I have drafted a statement of work that I will
append to this message. I would invite comments, suggestions, flames,
whatever. I'll need a revised version before the phone call.
I spoke with one of the 601XL builders who I was hoping could provide a
second signature on the bank account to provide a measure of fiscal control
for the project. He told me that he would not take that role because he was
concerned about potential liability. And, he more or less told me that I
was crazy if I took an active role. I guess I'm crazy. I think someone has
to take some initiative. It's either that, or walk away from a year of work
and a $16,000 investment. Because I do not have the confidence I need in
the aircraft at this time. However, his point is well taken, and I'm
considering the following steps to limit liability exposure:
* Distribute the engineering report only to those "members" who
have supported the analysis financially.
* Require each "member" to sign a release and hold harmless form that
would be shamelessly plagiarized from the forms I had to sign for ZAC and
JabiruUSA.
* Initiate work on the analysis only after enough funding has been
received to fund the complete statement of work.
* If sufficient funds are not received within 4 weeks of the initial
request for funding, then all checks will be returned using a SASE provided
by each "member," and the analysis will not be done.
Again, I invite your comments, flames, whatever, on the above. It's
possible imposing the above conditions would decrease support so that the
analysis could not be made. If so, I would be happy to relinquish my role
to anyone who has a better idea to make the analysis happen. Let me know
if you are interested.
Draft Statement of Work:
Zenith Builders Analysis Group
Statement of Work for Zenith CH601XL Independent Engineering Analysis
Rev. 0
April 26, 2008
GOAL: The goal of this analysis is to analyze the wing design of the CH601XL:
* To attempt to determine whether the structure, as designed, has
adequate strength to meet the published design loads of +6G and -3G.
* Assuming that the analysis shows that the structure, as designed
probably has adequate strength, then
* Evaluate the susceptibility of the flaps and ailerons to flutter. If
the analysis shows that flutter is a possible occurrence when a CH601XL is
flown within the design envelope, then evaluate possible modifications to
minimize or eliminate the flutter.
* Consider the effect of design options on the ability of the wing to
meet design standards:
* Hinged vs. skin flex hinge aileron attachment.
* Aileron trim tab option.
* Wing locker option.
* Landing light option.
* Thirty gallon vs. 24 gallon fuel tanks.
* ???
* Consider, to the extent possible given time and budget constraints,
the effect of typicalbuilder mistakes, e.g.,
* Wrong size or kind of rivets used at high stress location.
* Missing, loose, or wrong sized bolts.
* Mis-placed or wrong sized openings, e.g., the hole for the
aileron control rod, holes in ribs for wiring, fuel lines, pitot lines, etc.
* Two or three piece nose skin
* ???
The first task will be to Review the information available about the
accidents which have occurred that may have involved in-flight breakup of
the aircraft structure. The purpose of this review is to discover
information that might guide the analysis of the wing.
At the completion of the investigation, the engineer will submit a written
report covering the results and recommendations, if any, for changes to the
aircraft design to reduce the possibility of in-flight breakup.
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 65
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
My comments:
- I am not a lawyer. Although I can see some REMOTE possibility of the
engineer doing the analysis incurring some liability it is hard to see how
those paying him would. And any engineer worth his salt has been designing
real-world projects and already addressed the liability issue.
- I think the analysis should be informed by the load testing done to date
by Zenith's outside testing engineers. If at all possible the formal reports
from those tests should be obtained from Zenith (possibly directly by the
contracted engineer)
- If possible the engineer should be able to ask Zenith (preferably Chris)
questions during his investigation. Otherwise it is very likely that he will
finish his report with a conclusion of X and Zenith will come back and say
"but you didn't consider Y". Some kind of conversation during the
investigation would go a long way to ensure a useful outcome.
- I assume that when the hypothetical engineer hears about the events
motivating this project he will have his own ideas about what would make
sense in the statement of work. He (or she) has done this kind of thing
before, we have not. Your penultimate paragraph below basically says this.
- I suspect the statement of work will have to be greatly cut back to make
this project affordable. The question is how limited can the project be and
still produce a useful result.
- You might want to point whoever does the work to the Zenith Construction
Standards document too.
We could just wait until Sabrina has her degree and exploit her motivation.
But I don't want to wait 2 years until she graduates from MIT. J
-- Craig
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry Phillips
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 10:50 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Zenith Builders Analysis Group
At 02:24 PM 4/25/2008 -0500, John Bolding wrote:
Jeff,
No deviation from my feeble point of view.
.....
Progress is slow on the engineering front, I'm gonna call Thurston and see
if he's interested in the project in case the academic doesn't pan out. He
may want something useful to do in his spare time.
Ya'll choose up a point man so if somebody says they are ready to do it
there won't be any fumbling around. I think it needs to be a 601 guy in the
middle of this as there might be some back and forth.
Progress is indeed slow. However, there is some that I can report.
Apparently it is finals time at Embry-Riddle, so the profs are pretty busy.
I have sent them links to the Yuba City photos, as well as, scans of several
of my wing drawings. We have tentatively arranged a phone call on Thursday,
May 1 to discuss the engineering evaluation of the 601XL wing. In
preparation for that call, I have drafted a statement of work that I will
append to this message. I would invite comments, suggestions, flames,
whatever. I'll need a revised version before the phone call.
I spoke with one of the 601XL builders who I was hoping could provide a
second signature on the bank account to provide a measure of fiscal control
for the project. He told me that he would not take that role because he was
concerned about potential liability. And, he more or less told me that I was
crazy if I took an active role. I guess I'm crazy. I think someone has to
take some initiative. It's either that, or walk away from a year of work and
a $16,000 investment. Because I do not have the confidence I need in the
aircraft at this time. However, his point is well taken, and I'm considering
the following steps to limit liability exposure:
* Distribute the engineering report only to those "members" who have
supported the analysis financially.
* Require each "member" to sign a release and hold harmless form that
would be shamelessly plagiarized from the forms I had to sign for ZAC and
JabiruUSA.
* Initiate work on the analysis only after enough funding has been
received to fund the complete statement of work.
* If sufficient funds are not received within 4 weeks of the initial
request for funding, then all checks will be returned using a SASE provided
by each "member," and the analysis will not be done.
Again, I invite your comments, flames, whatever, on the above. It's possible
imposing the above conditions would decrease support so that the analysis
could not be made. If so, I would be happy to relinquish my role to anyone
who has a better idea to make the analysis happen. Let me know if you are
interested.
Draft Statement of Work:
Zenith Builders Analysis Group
Statement of Work for Zenith CH601XL Independent Engineering Analysis
Rev. 0
April 26, 2008
GOAL: The goal of this analysis is to analyze the wing design of the
CH601XL:
1. To attempt to determine whether the structure, as designed, has
adequate strength to meet the published design loads of +6G and -3G.
2. Assuming that the analysis shows that the structure, as designed
probably has adequate strength, then
3. Evaluate the susceptibility of the flaps and ailerons to flutter. If
the analysis shows that flutter is a possible occurrence when a CH601XL is
flown within the design envelope, then evaluate possible modifications to
minimize or eliminate the flutter.
4. Consider the effect of design options on the ability of the wing to
meet design standards:
1. Hinged vs. skin flex hinge aileron attachment.
2. Aileron trim tab option.
3. Wing locker option.
4. Landing light option.
5. Thirty gallon vs. 24 gallon fuel tanks.
6. ???
5. Consider, to the extent possible given time and budget constraints,
the effect of typicalbuilder mistakes, e.g.,
1. Wrong size or kind of rivets used at high stress location.
2. Missing, loose, or wrong sized bolts.
3. Mis-placed or wrong sized openings, e.g., the hole for the aileron
control rod, holes in ribs for wiring, fuel lines, pitot lines, etc.
4. Two or three piece nose skin
5. ???
The first task will be to Review the information available about the
accidents which have occurred that may have involved in-flight breakup of
the aircraft structure. The purpose of this review is to discover
information that might guide the analysis of the wing.
At the completion of the investigation, the engineer will submit a written
report covering the results and recommendations, if any, for changes to the
aircraft design to reduce the possibility of in-flight breakup.
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/
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|