Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:56 AM - Re: Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (Iberplanes IGL)
2. 03:01 AM - Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (Iberplanes IGL)
3. 04:41 AM - Re: Re: New Project Problems (David Downey)
4. 04:41 AM - Re: New Project Problems (ashontz)
5. 04:45 AM - Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (David Downey)
6. 04:46 AM - Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (ashontz)
7. 04:51 AM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (kmccune)
8. 07:02 AM - Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (Southern Reflections)
9. 07:23 AM - Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (Scott Thatcher)
10. 07:30 AM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (M.Marcotte)
11. 07:40 AM - Re: Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. (Iberplanes IGL)
12. 07:53 AM - Re: 701 First Flight (Jeffrey A Beachy)
13. 08:01 AM - Re: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (steve)
14. 08:03 AM - Zenith Builders Analysis Group (Scott Thatcher)
15. 08:33 AM - 601XL- how long?- till R.I.P. (Dave G.)
16. 08:42 AM - Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (PatrickW)
17. 08:51 AM - Re: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (Jaybannist@cs.com)
18. 09:06 AM - Re: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (steve)
19. 09:06 AM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (Bill Steer)
20. 09:24 AM - canopy latch cable (leinad)
21. 09:33 AM - Re: canopy latch cable (Craig Payne)
22. 09:48 AM - Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (lwhitlow)
23. 10:02 AM - Unintended Consequences, and this outside engineering Plan (lwhitlow)
24. 10:18 AM - Don't Give Up the CH601XL dREAM (PLAV8R)
25. 10:29 AM - Re: Unintended Consequences, and this outside engineering Plan (pavel569)
26. 10:31 AM - Re: Unintended Consequences, and this outside engineering Plan (Craig Payne)
27. 11:11 AM - I know this guy.............. (steve)
28. 11:19 AM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (Sabrina)
29. 11:24 AM - Re: I know this guy.............. (Aerolitellc@aol.com)
30. 11:38 AM - Re: Don't Give Up the CH601XL dREAM (sdthatcher)
31. 11:53 AM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (Gig Giacona)
32. 12:03 PM - Re: I know this guy.............. (Juan Vega)
33. 12:07 PM - Re: Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (Terry Phillips)
34. 12:23 PM - Re: I know this guy.............. (David Downey)
35. 12:25 PM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (MaxNr@aol.com)
36. 12:26 PM - Re: Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (Craig Payne)
37. 12:40 PM - Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (lwhitlow)
38. 12:54 PM - Re: I know this guy............... (MaxNr@aol.com)
39. 01:14 PM - Re: Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron (Paul Mulwitz)
40. 01:28 PM - Re: 601XL- how long?- till R.I.P. (john H)
41. 01:49 PM - Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group (ashontz)
42. 02:22 PM - Re: I know this guy.............. (steve)
43. 02:58 PM - Re: I know this guy.............. (Aerolitellc@aol.com)
44. 04:16 PM - Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION (floyd wilkes)
45. 04:23 PM - Monday Evening Chat Reminder For Digesters (George Race)
46. 05:36 PM - Re: canopy latch cable (Bryan Martin)
47. 07:03 PM - Registration questions E-LSA (dstasch)
48. 07:18 PM - Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft (sdthatcher)
49. 07:19 PM - Re: Registration questions E-LSA (Craig Payne)
50. 07:21 PM - Re: Registration questions E-LSA (Paul Mulwitz)
51. 07:53 PM - Re: Registration questions E-LSA (Ronald Steele)
52. 08:11 PM - Re: Registration questions E-LSA (Bryan Martin)
53. 10:10 PM - Re: Registration questions E-LSA (dstasch)
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: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case |
closed.
Hi there,
I have seen the pictures of the spanish incident, and a partial report.
Seems to be a match-case with this one. I also asked Gary and William to
translate some parts into English.
Regarding the photos, still waiting authorization to publish on the site.
Sorry on this.
talk to you soon,
Alberto Martin
Iberplanes IGL
http://www.iberplanes.es
Igualada - Barcelona - Espaa
----- Original Message -----
From: "dfmoeller" <dfmoeller@austin.rr.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 1:24 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say
case closed.
>
> Just asking, in all seriousness, because I've lost track; was the Spanish
> incident explained, or did that turn out not to be a wing fold?
>
> Doug
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179264#179264
>
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
I think engine choise vs vibrations should be included. E.g.. Rotax 912
and Jab3300.
Alberto Martin
Iberplanes IGL
http://www.iberplanes.es
Igualada - Barcelona - Espa=F1a
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Payne
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 8:54 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 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
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
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:
a.. Distribute the engineering report only to those "members" who
have supported the analysis financially.
b.. 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.
c.. Initiate work on the analysis only after enough funding has been
received to fund the complete statement of work.
d.. 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/
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: New Project Problems |
Hi Ron;
I am not the originator of the message but the shear values are simply the minimum
load transfer condition - and even then they only apply when the joint is
burr free and sheared up. Face to face friction due to clamping is a major transfer
component.
Usually, in certificated aircraft, when you see an ultimate failure, you usually
see rows of rivets popped intermingled with sheet failure in and out of those
rows of holes. The butts or heads of those rivets are many times still present
on one side of the other.
Design of a riveted joint involves knowing the bearing strength of the component(s)
to be joined and the shear and tension capabilities of the fastener. The
pattern and fastyener diameter is selected to give as nearly even a failure mode
split between fastener shear and sheet bearing. Since our fasteners depend
to a very great deal on the work hardening of the fastener during setting, the
hole size and quality are VERY important - and not many people care about that
anymore (or proper deburring) ...takes too long, is not critical, not building
SSTs, etc.
Ronald Steele <rsteele@rjsit.com> wrote: 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. Ive attached a close-up of a shot of Lance Gingells 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.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Project Problems |
I wholely agree. The torque value/clamp force, has been dicussed here before. I
still think under enough cycles, that spr will move a bit if not reamed. Movement
leads to fatigue, leads to failure.
The plans call for reaming, yet they say it's not critical. Doesn't mkae sense,
particularly for that joint. Reaming is the way to go.
[quote="n801bh(at)netzero.com"]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?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
_____________________________________________________________
Prepare for the unexpected. Click now to prepare a living trust. (http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2222/fc/Ioyw6i4tFu4ocgOCfRKhlYkj1yAtOR52JrXQfKa2BOX8dqxmt3hZpw/)
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179543#179543
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: Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
do not archive
Terry;
Why +6 -3 G's? My current edition plans still show +/-6 G's.
Terry Phillips <ttp44@rkymtn.net> wrote: 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/
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case closed. |
"Matched case" meaning what, that it appears as though there was no bolt in the
rear spar?
Iberplanes wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I have seen the pictures of the spanish incident, and a partial report.
> Seems to be a match-case with this one. I also asked Gary and William to
> translate some parts into English.
>
> Regarding the photos, still waiting authorization to publish on the site.
> Sorry on this.
>
> talk to you soon,
>
> Alberto Martin
> Iberplanes IGL
> http://www.iberplanes.es
> Igualada - Barcelona - Espa
> ---
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179544#179544
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: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
Don't forget to give yourself a way to know that the alternator has quit, otherwise
the battery may not be of any use. Voltmeter, idiot light ect...
--------
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=179546#179546
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: Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
Terry,I sent the email to Matt,no reply as of yet, just read your post,
and I 'am with this effort 100%, like I said before my plane is staying
on the ground untill this matter is solved. keep me in the loop....Joe
N101HD 601XL/RAM
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry Phillips
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 12:49 AM
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:
a.. Distribute the engineering report only to those "members" who
have supported the analysis financially.
b.. 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.
c.. Initiate work on the analysis only after enough funding has been
received to fund the complete statement of work.
d.. 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/
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: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
Just a quick note for those who are concerned about flying their 601XL amid
the recent accident paranoia (I include me as well).
Use a Borescope: The 601XL that sustained vibration damage during a
descending turn and who has successfully repaired that damage has mentioned
that prior to his first flight, he used a borescope to inspect the inside of
the wing, spar and caps, and found them in excellent condition. He was
planning to fly shortly.
Nylon Flap Stop: Also, another reminder to be sure you have installed the
nylon flap stops as indicated in the plans. I have seen two aircraft without
them and one stated that he felt vibration in the wing during cruise flight!
The flaps should not exhibit any movement whatsoever when in the up position
and the nylon stop guarantees that condition will apply. Naturally, when you
lower the flaps, there is a certain amount of movement however the speed at
which you lower the flaps is (should be) significantly lower.
Getting ready for first flight this month!
Scott Thatcher, Palm Beach Gardens, FL
601XL with Corvair, Registered as E-LSA
N601EL, http://placestofly.com, EAA203
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
I would install a small alternator like this one
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/sdaltreg.php (only 4 pounds)
where the vacuum pump normally goes and connect it to a completely separate
electrical system for the second fuel pump and for a few critical electrical
flight instruments that would replace the normally vacuum-driven
instruments. I would install the minimum size battery that this alternator
will accept. You might want to add a tie-breaker that could connect your
two electrical systems together in case one of your alternators fails in
flight but keep in mind that the new alternator provides only 8 amps. This
is also a very nice back-up system for glass panels and with this
installation you would never need to install the mechanical pump.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Phillips" <ttp44@rkymtn.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 10:58 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 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 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say case |
closed.
no, it was flying ok, Then a witness saw the plane folding both wings,
another one heard a noise and when it looked up saw the plane like the other
witness..
Ive asked Gary and William to translate something in English. Please, wait
until I get that done. I will publish photos as soon as I get the photo
release.
Alberto Martin
Iberplanes IGL
http://www.iberplanes.es
Igualada - Barcelona - Espaa
----- Original Message -----
From: "ashontz" <ashontz@nbme.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 1:44 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing to say
case closed.
>
> "Matched case" meaning what, that it appears as though there was no bolt
> in the rear spar?
>
>
> Iberplanes wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I have seen the pictures of the spanish incident, and a partial report.
>> Seems to be a match-case with this one. I also asked Gary and William to
>> translate some parts into English.
>>
>> Regarding the photos, still waiting authorization to publish on the site.
>> Sorry on this.
>>
>> talk to you soon,
>>
>> Alberto Martin
>> Iberplanes IGL
>> http://www.iberplanes.es
>> Igualada - Barcelona - EspaS
>> ---
>
>
> --------
> Andy Shontz
> CH601XL - Corvair
> www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179544#179544
>
>
>
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: 701 First Flight |
Congratulations on your first flight! Enjoy many wonderful hours in your
701. It's a blast to fly.
Jeff Beachy
N701N, 70 hours
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: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
ok, I give... What Flap stop ?????
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Thatcher" <s_thatcher@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 7:20 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft
> <s_thatcher@bellsouth.net>
>
> Just a quick note for those who are concerned about flying their 601XL
> amid the recent accident paranoia (I include me as well).
>
> Use a Borescope: The 601XL that sustained vibration damage during a
> descending turn and who has successfully repaired that damage has
> mentioned that prior to his first flight, he used a borescope to inspect
> the inside of the wing, spar and caps, and found them in excellent
> condition. He was planning to fly shortly.
>
> Nylon Flap Stop: Also, another reminder to be sure you have installed the
> nylon flap stops as indicated in the plans. I have seen two aircraft
> without them and one stated that he felt vibration in the wing during
> cruise flight! The flaps should not exhibit any movement whatsoever when
> in the up position and the nylon stop guarantees that condition will
> apply. Naturally, when you lower the flaps, there is a certain amount of
> movement however the speed at which you lower the flaps is (should be)
> significantly lower.
>
> Getting ready for first flight this month!
>
> Scott Thatcher, Palm Beach Gardens, FL
> 601XL with Corvair, Registered as E-LSA
> N601EL, http://placestofly.com, EAA203
>
>
>
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: | Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
Thanks Terry for taking an active part in this endeavor.
Here are some additional items that I feel need to be addressed as well.
1.. Smoking rivets (or elongated rivet holes in wing areas)
2.. Varying amounts of fuel (someone mentioned that a flutter was
observed in a different aircraft when fuel was 1/3 capacity)
3.. Missing nylon flap stop (inducing vibrations at cruise)
Thanks again for your efforts.
Scott Thatcher, Palm Beach Gardens, FL
601XL with Corvair, Registered as E-LSA
N601EL, http://placestofly.com, EAA203
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: | 601XL- how long?- till R.I.P. |
I have no idea how, why, or even IF the wings fold up on the 601 XL. But
it's the dominant subject on this builders newsgroup. I'm not suggesting it
shouldn't be but since Zenith has walked away from ALL their previous ideas
and designs. The CH100, CH-200, CH-300 etc. How long will it be be before
this question simply sinks the whole 601XL line?
I actually like the olders designs better, the 601 HD is my favorite. Those
thick, thick wings skip through turbulant air with very little bumping.
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: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
sdthatcher wrote:
> The 601XL that sustained vibration damage during a
> descending turn and who has successfully repaired that damage has mentioned that
What vibration damage...?
This sounds like another data point.
And something we should add to the list of things to check.
Thanks,
Patrick
XL/Corvair
N63PZ (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179580#179580
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: | Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
Steve,
See Drawing 6-S-3.
Jay in Dallas
"steve" <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
>ok, I give... What Flap stop ?????
>----- Original Message -----
>
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: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
OMG !
I love this website !!!
SW
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jaybannist@cs.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft
>
> Steve,
>
> See Drawing 6-S-3.
>
> Jay in Dallas
>
>
> "steve" <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>ok, I give... What Flap stop ?????
>>----- Original Message -----
>>
>
>
>
>
>
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: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
What George suggests can be done indirectly, with the endurance buss
normally fed through a diode bridge that derives it's feed from the
output side of the battery contactor, but with an switch-controlled
alternate feed directly from the battery (i.e., the input side of the
battery contactor). One fuel pump is then fed from the endurance buss.
See Figure Z1 of the Aeroeletric Connection publication, which uses a
fuselink for protecting the wire.
Bill
601HD Stratus N109BS
george may wrote:
> I'd insure one pump is feed directly from your battery(fused
> appropriately), while the other can run off of your electrical
> distribution buss. Typically loosing electrics implies loss of
> alternator. The battery will usually last 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
>
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: | canopy latch cable |
I'm working on my canopy frame and I need to purchase the canopy latch cable.
Is this a throttle cable? If so, does someone either have a part number or some
specs. I've looked at some throttle cables on Summit Racing catalog, but not
sure what the best length would be.
Dan Dempsey
Plans building 601XL.
--------
Scratch building XL with Corvair Engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179590#179590
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: | canopy latch cable |
My factory supplied cable seems more like the brake or shifter cables on a
bicycle.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of leinad
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 10:22 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: canopy latch cable
I'm working on my canopy frame and I need to purchase the canopy latch
cable. Is this a throttle cable? If so, does someone either have a part
number or some specs. I've looked at some throttle cables on Summit Racing
catalog, but not sure what the best length would be.
Dan Dempsey
Plans building 601XL.
--------
Scratch building XL with Corvair Engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179590#179590
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
Terry and others who want an outside engineering analysis.
I do understand your desire to be confident in the design and safety of the 601XL.
Like you I have a $17500 kit that I want to be able to fly safely.
But if you proceed with the analysis under the terms you have stated below, You
will destroy not only your own investment of both time and money but you will
destroy everyone else's investments in their aircraft as well, NO MATTER WHAT
THE ENGINEERING REPORT HAS TO SAY!!
Curious?? I'll explain.
If the analysis is done and a completed report exists then....
If the results of the report are only seen by the "contributors" A giant unanswered
question hangs over the aircraft, Is it OK??? Has a problem been found? Are
there modifications suggested?? This will weaken the "airplane shopping publics"
opinion of the aircraft, and perhaps be enough to make them choose another
aircraft with "less of an unknown factor". Even if the report says every things
A-OK, the very fact that its a secret, will deter buyers. If this choice
occurs enough times then Zenith ceases production and support of the 601XL or
perhaps ceases business all together. I'm sure we can all agree that this would
not be a desirable outcome.
Also a engineering report known only to some of the fleet of 601XL devalues them
all. Questions will arise? Do you know about the report? Have you made modifications
based on the report? Once again confusion and unknowns take over and
we all loose.
More importantly Lets say the report reveals something that should be addressed,
and you get your secret copy. Are you, ( a builder, a pilot, an aviation enthusiast)
actually going to let another pilot or builder fly a machine that you
know has a problem and NOT TELL HIM OR HER ABOUT IT!!! That's not what the
sport aviation community should be all about. Could you live with yourself knowing
you could have prevented a tragedy but did nothing because the other person
didn't contribute to the funding of this witch hunt. By the way what if some
people contribute less than others to the funding of this report??? Are you
only going to give them part of the data? Maybe the higher dollar contributors
get the data first and its held from the lower dollar contributors for a period
of time.
And of course if the report says "everything is fine" Now What? Its a secret,
so all of the bad things listed above still happen, and the shrill voices calling
for a redesign or "beef up" or whatever continue un-abated. AND WE ALL STILL
LOOSE.
The sport aviation community is about helping yourself and others fly enjoyably
and safely. A secret report will do none of that and quite possibly be the beginning
of the end of our hobby and pastime as we know it. I hope than my son
will be able to learn to fly and to build his own airplane someday. This has
all the earmarks of seriously damaging something that I dearly love to do.
Any crash or problem with a amateur built experimental aircraft affects us all.
If we don't take good care and be as responsible as we possibly can within the
rules currently in place, then the not so interested government WILL step in
and make things harder for all of us.
I seen posts recently with all sorts of speculation, guesses, critical observations,
and truly useful thoughts and suggestions, I think the discussion is valid
and useful as long as it is the open exchange of ideas and working towards
a common goal of a safe and fun airplane
But, I implore all of you to not give into fear and hysteria while we search for
a cause or problem. Statements like "As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing
to say case closed." have no place. We only know what we see in one set of pictures
and what limited reports that have been released by the FAA. Analyzing
such a limited data set takes time. The FAA has not stated a cause, the designer
of the aircraft has not sated a cause. The manufacturer of the kit has not
stated a cause, yet some people on this very forum want to put themselves above
all of those knowledgeable and qualified people and say that there is a problem
because they have managed to scrape together $18000 and buy a kit. It almost
makes the statement, "are you an engineer?? No but I stayed in a Holiday Inn
Express last night" seem reasonable.
I would rather take contributions up to send Sabrina to the finest aviation and
engineering schools in the world. Its people like her we need to be encouraging
if we want to be able to pursue our hobby and to pass on the joy of flight
to generations to come. We need younger people to be excited by piloting you own
aircraft, and to be able to afford to do it. Look around you own EAA Chapters.
How many up and comers do you have attending?
FUD Fear Uncertainty Doubt. These are not the characteristics you look for in
a pilot. Seems to me we need to address this before we move on to metallurgy
and tensile strength.
Larry Whitlow
Valparaiso IN
601XL Builder
Pilot since Age 15 Solo'ed on my 16th birthday Dad had to drive me to the Airport,
because I couldn't get my drivers license for another month
> ="Terry Phillips"]At 02:24 PM 4/25/2008 -0500,
>
> >>EDIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179597#179597
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: | Unintended Consequences, and this outside engineering Plan |
I copied my post from another thread to a thread of its own to help us focus a
discussion on the merits of this outside engineering review. I apologize in advance
for the long post.
I hope everyone realizes that Zenith aircraft has a vested interest in making sure
the 601XL design is safe. I'm confident that everyone at the factory is as
concerned as we are and want to make sure they've done everything possible to
give us a safe aircraft. I've flown with Nick in the factory demonstrator, and
I cannot believe anyone would think for one second that Nick would continue
to take people flying in an aircraft that he or the rest of the staff at Zenith
thought was unsafe. There is to much at stake for that to happen
I do understand your desire to be confident in the design and safety of the 601XL.
Like you I have a $17500 kit that I want to be able to fly safely.
But if you proceed with the analysis under the terms you have stated below, You
will destroy not only your own investment of both time and money but you will
destroy everyone else's investments in their aircraft as well, NO MATTER WHAT
THE ENGINEERING REPORT HAS TO SAY!!
Curious?? I'll explain.
If the analysis is done and a completed report exists then....
If the results of the report are only seen by the "contributors" A giant unanswered
question hangs over the aircraft, Is it OK??? Has a problem been found? Are
there modifications suggested?? This will weaken the "airplane shopping publics"
opinion of the aircraft, and perhaps be enough to make them choose another
aircraft with "less of an unknown factor". Even if the report says every things
A-OK, the very fact that its a secret, will deter buyers. If this choice
occurs enough times then Zenith ceases production and support of the 601XL or
perhaps ceases business all together. I'm sure we can all agree that this would
not be a desirable outcome.
Also a engineering report known only to some of the fleet of 601XL devalues them
all. Questions will arise? Do you know about the report? Have you made modifications
based on the report? Once again confusion and unknowns take over and
we all loose.
More importantly Lets say the report reveals something that should be addressed,
and you get your secret copy. Are you, ( a builder, a pilot, an aviation enthusiast)
actually going to let another pilot or builder fly a machine that you
know has a problem and NOT TELL HIM OR HER ABOUT IT!!! That's not what the
sport aviation community should be all about. Could you live with yourself knowing
you could have prevented a tragedy but did nothing because the other person
didn't contribute to the funding of this witch hunt. By the way what if some
people contribute less than others to the funding of this report??? Are you
only going to give them part of the data? Maybe the higher dollar contributors
get the data first and its held from the lower dollar contributors for a period
of time. And what if Zenith disagrees with these results or changes?? Who
are you going to trust???? If you say the outside engineer. Sell your kit
or plane now, because if something else happens after the report is out and mods
are made you really won't know who is correct.
And of course if the report says "everything is fine" Now What? Its a secret,
so all of the bad things listed above still happen, and the shrill voices calling
for a redesign or "beef up" or whatever continue un-abated. AND WE ALL STILL
LOOSE.
The sport aviation community is about helping yourself and others fly enjoyably
and safely. A secret report will do none of that and quite possibly be the beginning
of the end of our hobby and pastime as we know it. I hope than my son
will be able to learn to fly and to build his own airplane someday. This has
all the earmarks of seriously damaging something that I dearly love to do.
Any crash or problem with a amateur built experimental aircraft affects us all.
If we don't take good care and be as responsible as we possibly can within the
rules currently in place, then the not so interested government WILL step in
and make things harder for all of us.
I seen posts recently with all sorts of speculation, guesses, critical observations,
and truly useful thoughts and suggestions, I think the discussion is valid
and useful as long as it is the open exchange of ideas and working towards
a common goal of a safe and fun airplane
But, I implore all of you to not give into fear and hysteria while we search for
a cause or problem. Statements like "As far as Yuba City, I'm almost willing
to say case closed." have no place. We only know what we see in one set of pictures
and what limited reports that have been released by the FAA. Analyzing
such a limited data set takes time. The FAA has not stated a cause, the designer
of the aircraft has not sated a cause. The manufacturer of the kit has not
stated a cause, yet some people on this very forum want to put themselves above
all of those knowledgeable and qualified people and say that there is a problem
because they have managed to scrape together $18000 and buy a kit. It almost
makes the statement, "are you an engineer?? No but I stayed in a Holiday Inn
Express last night" seem reasonable.
I would rather take contributions up to send Sabrina to the finest aviation and
engineering schools in the world. Its people like her we need to be encouraging
if we want to be able to pursue our hobby and to pass on the joy of flight
to generations to come. We need younger people to be excited by piloting your
own aircraft, and to be able to afford to do it. Look around you own EAA Chapters.
How many up and comers do you have attending?
FUD Fear Uncertainty Doubt. These are not the characteristics you look for in
a pilot. Seems to me we need to address this before we move on to metallurgy
and tensile strength.
///Flame suit on cause I know I'm gonna catch heat for this
Larry Whitlow
Valparaiso IN
601XL Builder
Pilot since Age 15 Solo'ed on my 16th birthday Dad had to drive me to the Airport,
because I couldn't get my drivers license for another month
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179600#179600
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: | Don't Give Up the CH601XL dREAM |
>From my post in another subject:
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=179604#179604
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: Unintended Consequences, and this outside engineering |
Plan
Well said Larry. I agree 100%.
--------
Pavel
CA
Zodiac XL N581PM (Reserved)
Tail, flaps, ailerons done, right wing on the table ....
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179607#179607
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: | Unintended Consequences, and this outside engineering |
Plan
Also there is zero chance that the final report (no matter what it contains)
won't be leaked eventually.
As to liability, anyone can sue anyone for any reason (winning is another
story). But litigants go after the ones with large assets or liability
insurance. In the John Denver case the heirs sued the maker of the fuel
selector valve and the supplier (Aircraft Spruce) but NOT the guy who built
the plane and placed the valve in an extremely awkward location. The result
was a confidential settlement for the usual "undisclosed sum and no
assumption of guilt".
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of lwhitlow
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 11:00 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Unintended Consequences, and this outside engineering
Plan
I copied my post from another thread to a thread of its own to help us focus
a discussion on the merits of this outside engineering review. I apologize
in advance for the long post.
I hope everyone realizes that Zenith aircraft has a vested interest in
making sure the 601XL design is safe. I'm confident that everyone at the
factory is as concerned as we are and want to make sure they've done
everything possible to give us a safe aircraft. I've flown with Nick in the
factory demonstrator, and I cannot believe anyone would think for one second
that Nick would continue to take people flying in an aircraft that he or the
rest of the staff at Zenith thought was unsafe. There is to much at stake
for that to happen
I do understand your desire to be confident in the design and safety of the
601XL. Like you I have a $17500 kit that I want to be able to fly safely.
But if you proceed with the analysis under the terms you have stated below,
You will destroy not only your own investment of both time and money but you
will destroy everyone else's investments in their aircraft as well, NO
MATTER WHAT THE ENGINEERING REPORT HAS TO SAY!!
Curious?? I'll explain.
If the analysis is done and a completed report exists then....
If the results of the report are only seen by the "contributors" A giant
unanswered question hangs over the aircraft, Is it OK??? Has a problem been
found? Are there modifications suggested?? This will weaken the "airplane
shopping publics" opinion of the aircraft, and perhaps be enough to make
them choose another aircraft with "less of an unknown factor". Even if the
report says every things A-OK, the very fact that its a secret, will deter
buyers. If this choice occurs enough times then Zenith ceases production and
support of the 601XL or perhaps ceases business all together. I'm sure we
can all agree that this would not be a desirable outcome.
Also a engineering report known only to some of the fleet of 601XL devalues
them all. Questions will arise? Do you know about the report? Have you made
modifications based on the report? Once again confusion and unknowns take
over and we all loose.
More importantly Lets say the report reveals something that should be
addressed, and you get your secret copy. Are you, ( a builder, a pilot, an
aviation enthusiast) actually going to let another pilot or builder fly a
machine that you know has a problem and NOT TELL HIM OR HER ABOUT IT!!!
That's not what the sport aviation community should be all about. Could you
live with yourself knowing you could have prevented a tragedy but did
nothing because the other person didn't contribute to the funding of this
witch hunt. By the way what if some people contribute less than others to
the funding of this report??? Are you only going to give them part of the
data? Maybe the higher dollar contributors get the data first and its held
from the lower dollar contributors for a period of time. And what if Zenith
disagrees with these results or changes?? Who are you going to trust????
If you say the outside engineer. Sell your kit or plane now, because if
something else happens afte!
r the report is out and mods are made you really won't know who is correct.
And of course if the report says "everything is fine" Now What? Its a
secret, so all of the bad things listed above still happen, and the shrill
voices calling for a redesign or "beef up" or whatever continue un-abated.
AND WE ALL STILL LOOSE.
The sport aviation community is about helping yourself and others fly
enjoyably and safely. A secret report will do none of that and quite
possibly be the beginning of the end of our hobby and pastime as we know it.
I hope than my son will be able to learn to fly and to build his own
airplane someday. This has all the earmarks of seriously damaging something
that I dearly love to do.
Any crash or problem with a amateur built experimental aircraft affects us
all. If we don't take good care and be as responsible as we possibly can
within the rules currently in place, then the not so interested government
WILL step in and make things harder for all of us.
I seen posts recently with all sorts of speculation, guesses, critical
observations, and truly useful thoughts and suggestions, I think the
discussion is valid and useful as long as it is the open exchange of ideas
and working towards a common goal of a safe and fun airplane
But, I implore all of you to not give into fear and hysteria while we search
for a cause or problem. Statements like "As far as Yuba City, I'm almost
willing to say case closed." have no place. We only know what we see in one
set of pictures and what limited reports that have been released by the FAA.
Analyzing such a limited data set takes time. The FAA has not stated a
cause, the designer of the aircraft has not sated a cause. The manufacturer
of the kit has not stated a cause, yet some people on this very forum want
to put themselves above all of those knowledgeable and qualified people and
say that there is a problem because they have managed to scrape together
$18000 and buy a kit. It almost makes the statement, "are you an engineer??
No but I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night" seem reasonable.
I would rather take contributions up to send Sabrina to the finest aviation
and engineering schools in the world. Its people like her we need to be
encouraging if we want to be able to pursue our hobby and to pass on the joy
of flight to generations to come. We need younger people to be excited by
piloting your own aircraft, and to be able to afford to do it. Look around
you own EAA Chapters. How many up and comers do you have attending?
FUD Fear Uncertainty Doubt. These are not the characteristics you look for
in a pilot. Seems to me we need to address this before we move on to
metallurgy and tensile strength.
///Flame suit on cause I know I'm gonna catch heat for this
Larry Whitlow
Valparaiso IN
601XL Builder
Pilot since Age 15 Solo'ed on my 16th birthday Dad had to drive me to the
Airport, because I couldn't get my drivers license for another month
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179600#179600
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: | I know this guy.............. |
I know this builder who has checked his flap settings and one flap is
not quite the same as the other...it doesnt raise as high as the other..
Its off by about 2 degrees.....
"If" I were to talk to him about adjusting them to have each exactly the
same, what would I say ??
Steve ( name withheld by REQUEST )
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: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
AUX bus plus a small AUX battery plus a:
http://www.buzzaero.com/BuzzPump.html
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179623#179623
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscf2277_105.jpg
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: I know this guy.............. |
I would tell him he needs to re-drill his actuator rod that runs thru the
plane. It sounds like he has one that needs to be rotated slightly and then re-
drill the rod in a different place. It helps if he has a couple of people to
help and hold the flaps all the way up. I drill it and put in a cleco then
check it before I commit to the final bolt hole.
I know this builder who has checked his flap settings and one flap is not
quite the same as the other...it doesnt raise as high as the other.. Its off
by about 2 degrees.....
"If" I were to talk to him about adjusting them to have each exactly the
same, what would I say ??
Steve ( name withheld by REQUEST )
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Don't Give Up the CH601XL dREAM |
Don. Again thanks for your contribution. Your positive attitude is an inspiration!
I hope I can be as forgiving and understanding as you, should some extreme
misfortune visit my family.
Thanks.
--------
Scott Thatcher, Palm Beach Gardens, FL
601XL with Corvair, Registered as E-LSA
N601EL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179628#179628
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: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
Since I'm going to be flying a Corvair that not only has two electrical fuel pumps
but also needs electrics to power the ignition system I've looked at this
issue quite a bit.
The Aeroelectric manual has a pretty simple 2 battery design that charges both
batteries but separates them electrically.
It isn't an over design at all. The manual's out at the airport so I can't go over
the details but it really isn't that big a deal.
Jeyoung65(at)aol.com wrote:
> 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
>
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179631#179631
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: I know this guy.............. |
Have him check the alignment of the Flap control rod, remember it is three pieces
that need to be drilled correctly, (the one where most of us tend to F--k up
on, me included)
secondly check the alignment of the nylon bushings flap stop, are they 5mm both?
Check that at full up both flaps loct at thhe same setting.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: steve <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
>Sent: Apr 27, 2008 2:08 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: I know this guy..............
>
>I know this builder who has checked his flap settings and one flap is not quite
the same as the other...it doesnt raise as high as the other.. Its off by
about 2 degrees.....
>"If" I were to talk to him about adjusting them to have each exactly the same,
what would I say ??
>
>Steve ( name withheld by REQUEST )
>
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: Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
Larry
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I appreciate your thoughts. They
deserve a reply, so I will attempt one. For convenience, I will intersperse
my replies within your comment below
Terry
At 09:43 AM 4/27/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>Terry and others who want an outside engineering analysis.
>
>I do understand your desire to be confident in the design and safety of
>the 601XL. Like you I have a $17500 kit that I want to be able to fly safely.
>
>But if you proceed with the analysis under the terms you have stated
>below, You will destroy not only your own investment of both time and
>money but you will destroy everyone else's investments in their aircraft
>as well, NO MATTER WHAT THE ENGINEERING REPORT HAS TO SAY!!
I may be unusual, but I do not look at my 601XL as an investment. I plan to
fly it for as long as I am able to fly safely; eventually, my A/C will be
part of my estate, and my heirs can do with it what they please. I
recognize that, in the future, my personal circumstances may change and I
may wish to recover my investment in the A/C. I guess I'll have to cross
that bridge, if and when, I come to it.
>Curious?? I'll explain.
>
>If the analysis is done and a completed report exists then....
>
>If the results of the report are only seen by the "contributors" A giant
>unanswered question hangs over the aircraft, Is it OK??? Has a problem
>been found? Are there modifications suggested?? This will weaken the
>"airplane shopping publics" opinion of the aircraft, and perhaps be enough
>to make them choose another aircraft with "less of an unknown factor".
>Even if the report says every things A-OK, the very fact that its a
>secret, will deter buyers. If this choice occurs enough times then Zenith
>ceases production and support of the 601XL or perhaps ceases business all
>together. I'm sure we can all agree that this would not be a desirable outcome.
Distributing the report only to contributors is a selfish attempt on my
part to contain any potential liability for trying to get this analysis
done. To my knowledge, only the US Government can define "secret"
information in the USA. For most of my career I had a DOE Q-Clearance, and
at times also a DOD Top Secret Clearance. For many years I was an ADC, an
authorized derivative classifier. Even as an ADC, I was only allowed to
classify information subject to specific, written classification guidance
issued by someone, at a higher level. Someone who really had the authority
to determine what information could be classified. So no, the report will
not be "secret." However, by issuing copies of the report only to
members who have contributed to the project and signed my cobbled up
release and hold harmless agreement, I hope that I can deter any builder
(or worse, their heirs) from suing me because their lawyer has convinced
them that they have a grievance. What the "members" of the group do with
their copy of the report is up to them. But rest assured, they will not be
subject to criminal prosecution--as I would be if today I disclosed US
Government "secret" information. Perhaps I am overly paranoid. But I would
like to preserve my meagre estate for my heirs and not spend it on legal
expenses. Larry, you could personally resolve the "secret" issue by
contributing to the analysis, and then posting your copy of the report on
the Zenith-List. I'm just asking that you take that responsibility; don't
condemn me for not doing it. It is a sad commentary on the state of our
society that one must be concerned about the threat of litigation. But the
threat is real. In fact, I have read at least one post on the Zenith-List
that suggested that ZAC should be concerned. Good grief!
>Also a engineering report known only to some of the fleet of 601XL
>devalues them all. Questions will arise? Do you know about the
>report? Have you made modifications based on the report? Once again
>confusion and unknowns take over and we all loose.
>
>More importantly Lets say the report reveals something that should be
>addressed, and you get your secret copy. Are you, ( a builder, a pilot, an
>aviation enthusiast) actually going to let another pilot or builder fly a
>machine that you know has a problem and NOT TELL HIM OR HER ABOUT
>IT!!! That's not what the sport aviation community should be all about.
>Could you live with yourself knowing you could have prevented a tragedy
>but did nothing because the other person didn't contribute to the funding
>of this witch hunt. By the way what if some people contribute less than
>others to the funding of this report??? Are you only going to give them
>part of the data? Maybe the higher dollar contributors get the data first
>and its held from the lower dollar contributors for a period of time.
Membership in the group would not be restricted in any way. Chris Heinz is
welcome and encouraged to join. My expectation is that the analysis
will find that the XL design is essentially sound. In the event that a
significant flaw is detected, I would personally send a copy of the report
to the NTSB and let them take responsibility for further distribution of
that finding. In any event, I cannot and will not take responsibility to
"tell him or her about it." Particularly since, I do not know just whom
"him or her" might be.
>And of course if the report says "everything is fine" Now What? Its a
>secret, so all of the bad things listed above still happen, and the shrill
>voices calling for a redesign or "beef up" or whatever continue un-abated.
>AND WE ALL STILL LOOSE.
I fail to see how the engineering analysis of the 601XL design will
increase the FUD that you refer to. I expectation is that the analysis will
reduce FUD.
>The sport aviation community is about helping yourself and others fly
>enjoyably and safely. A secret report will do none of that and quite
>possibly be the beginning of the end of our hobby and pastime as we know
>it. I hope than my son will be able to learn to fly and to build his own
>airplane someday. This has all the earmarks of seriously damaging
>something that I dearly love to do.
>
>Any crash or problem with a amateur built experimental aircraft affects us
>all. If we don't take good care and be as responsible as we possibly can
>within the rules currently in place, then the not so interested
>government WILL step in and make things harder for all of us.
>
>I seen posts recently with all sorts of speculation, guesses, critical
>observations, and truly useful thoughts and suggestions, I think the
>discussion is valid and useful as long as it is the open exchange of ideas
>and working towards a common goal of a safe and fun airplane
>
>But, I implore all of you to not give into fear and hysteria while we
>search for a cause or problem. Statements like "As far as Yuba City, I'm
>almost willing to say case closed." have no place. We only know what we
>see in one set of pictures and what limited reports that have been
>released by the FAA. Analyzing such a limited data set takes time. The FAA
>has not stated a cause, the designer of the aircraft has not sated a
>cause. The manufacturer of the kit has not stated a cause, yet some people
>on this very forum want to put themselves above all of those knowledgeable
>and qualified people and say that there is a problem because they have
>managed to scrape together $18000 and buy a kit. It almost makes the
>statement, "are you an engineer?? No but I stayed in a Holiday Inn
>Express last night" seem reasonable.
I absolutely agree that knowledgeable analysis of the situation is
required. The only question is how to get that done.
>I would rather take contributions up to send Sabrina to the finest
>aviation and engineering schools in the world. Its people like her we need
>to be encouraging if we want to be able to pursue our hobby and to pass on
>the joy of flight to generations to come. We need younger people to be
>excited by piloting you own aircraft, and to be able to afford to do it.
>Look around you own EAA Chapters. How many up and comers do you have attending?
>
>FUD Fear Uncertainty Doubt. These are not the characteristics you look
>for in a pilot. Seems to me we need to address this before we move on to
>metallurgy and tensile strength.
Again, I suggest that the whole purpose of an independent analysis is to
address Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. There may be better ways to address
FUD, but I do not believe that a good way is to pretend that it is not
there. I am open to your suggestions for positive steps to reduce this FUD.
>Larry Whitlow
>Valparaiso IN
>601XL Builder
>Pilot since Age 15 Solo'ed on my 16th birthday Dad had to drive me to the
>Airport, because I couldn't get my drivers license for another month
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 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: I know this guy.............. |
might be wise to replace the rod completely to eliminate the chance of the double
hole biting later.
Aerolitellc@aol.com wrote: I would tell him he needs to re-drill his actuator
rod that runs thru the plane. It sounds like he has one that needs to be
rotated slightly and then re- drill the rod in a different place. It helps if
he has a couple of people to help and hold the flaps all the way up. I drill
it and put in a cleco then check it before I commit to the final bolt hole.
I know this builder who has checked his flap settings and one flap is not quite
the same as the other...it doesnt raise as high as the other.. Its off by
about 2 degrees.....
"If" I were to talk to him about adjusting them to have each exactly the
same, what would I say ??
Steve ( name withheld by REQUEST )
---------------------------------
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
Dave Downey
Harleysville (SE) PA
100 HP Corvair
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
Your O-200 has no fuel pump mounted now, but I know that it has a pad to
install one. You are planning to install one eventually. My humble recommendation
is to invest $300 (or less) and put one on now. Avoid the extra batteries &
switches.
Bob
Do not archive
**************
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for
U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 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: Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
I'm afraid that if you are trying to devise a strategy to minimize legal
liability then you really need to get a lawyer involved. The strategy may
only provide the illusion of some level of protection.
IMHO the plan should just not worry about liability. Those who are concerned
should just not join the group. True, this might greatly reduce the size of
the group but so might the confidentiality clause.
-- Craig, still building, still planning to fly my XL.
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry Phillips
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group
Larry
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I appreciate your thoughts. They
deserve a reply, so I will attempt one. For convenience, I will intersperse
my replies within your comment below
Terry
At 09:43 AM 4/27/2008 -0700, you wrote:
Terry and others who want an outside engineering analysis.
I do understand your desire to be confident in the design and safety of the
601XL. Like you I have a $17500 kit that I want to be able to fly safely.
But if you proceed with the analysis under the terms you have stated below,
You will destroy not only your own investment of both time and money but you
will destroy everyone else's investments in their aircraft as well, NO
MATTER WHAT THE ENGINEERING REPORT HAS TO SAY!!
I may be unusual, but I do not look at my 601XL as an investment. I plan to
fly it for as long as I am able to fly safely; eventually, my A/C will be
part of my estate, and my heirs can do with it what they please. I recognize
that, in the future, my personal circumstances may change and I may wish to
recover my investment in the A/C. I guess I'll have to cross that bridge, if
and when, I come to it.
Curious?? I'll explain.
If the analysis is done and a completed report exists then....
If the results of the report are only seen by the "contributors" A giant
unanswered question hangs over the aircraft, Is it OK??? Has a problem been
found? Are there modifications suggested?? This will weaken the "airplane
shopping publics" opinion of the aircraft, and perhaps be enough to make
them choose another aircraft with "less of an unknown factor". Even if the
report says every things A-OK, the very fact that its a secret, will deter
buyers. If this choice occurs enough times then Zenith ceases production and
support of the 601XL or perhaps ceases business all together. I'm sure we
can all agree that this would not be a desirable outcome.
Distributing the report only to contributors is a selfish attempt on my part
to contain any potential liability for trying to get this analysis done. To
my knowledge, only the US Government can define "secret" information in the
USA. For most of my career I had a DOE Q-Clearance, and at times also a DOD
Top Secret Clearance. For many years I was an ADC, an authorized derivative
classifier. Even as an ADC, I was only allowed to classify information
subject to specific, written classification guidance issued by someone, at a
higher level. Someone who really had the authority to determine what
information could be classified. So no, the report will not be "secret."
However, by issuing copies of the report only to members who have
contributed to the project and signed my cobbled up release and hold
harmless agreement, I hope that I can deter any builder (or worse, their
heirs) from suing me because their lawyer has convinced them that they have
a grievance. What the "members" of the group do with their copy of the
report is up to them. But rest assured, they will not be subject to
criminal prosecution--as I would be if today I disclosed US Government
"secret" information. Perhaps I am overly paranoid. But I would like to
preserve my meagre estate for my heirs and not spend it on legal expenses.
Larry, you could personally resolve the "secret" issue by contributing to
the analysis, and then posting your copy of the report on the Zenith-List.
I'm just asking that you take that responsibility; don't condemn me for not
doing it. It is a sad commentary on the state of our society that one must
be concerned about the threat of litigation. But the threat is real. In
fact, I have read at least one post on the Zenith-List that suggested that
ZAC should be concerned. Good grief!
Also a engineering report known only to some of the fleet of 601XL devalues
them all. Questions will arise? Do you know about the report? Have you made
modifications based on the report? Once again confusion and unknowns take
over and we all loose.
More importantly Lets say the report reveals something that should be
addressed, and you get your secret copy. Are you, ( a builder, a pilot, an
aviation enthusiast) actually going to let another pilot or builder fly a
machine that you know has a problem and NOT TELL HIM OR HER ABOUT IT!!!
That's not what the sport aviation community should be all about. Could you
live with yourself knowing you could have prevented a tragedy but did
nothing because the other person didn't contribute to the funding of this
witch hunt. By the way what if some people contribute less than others to
the funding of this report??? Are you only going to give them part of the
data? Maybe the higher dollar contributors get the data first and its held
from the lower dollar contributors for a period of time.
Membership in the group would not be restricted in any way. Chris Heinz is
welcome and encouraged to join. My expectation is that the analysis will
find that the XL design is essentially sound. In the event that a
significant flaw is detected, I would personally send a copy of the report
to the NTSB and let them take responsibility for further distribution of
that finding. In any event, I cannot and will not take responsibility to
"tell him or her about it." Particularly since, I do not know just whom "him
or her" might be.
And of course if the report says "everything is fine" Now What? Its a
secret, so all of the bad things listed above still happen, and the shrill
voices calling for a redesign or "beef up" or whatever continue un-abated.
AND WE ALL STILL LOOSE.
I fail to see how the engineering analysis of the 601XL design will increase
the FUD that you refer to. I expectation is that the analysis will reduce
FUD.
The sport aviation community is about helping yourself and others fly
enjoyably and safely. A secret report will do none of that and quite
possibly be the beginning of the end of our hobby and pastime as we know it.
I hope than my son will be able to learn to fly and to build his own
airplane someday. This has all the earmarks of seriously damaging something
that I dearly love to do.
Any crash or problem with a amateur built experimental aircraft affects us
all. If we don't take good care and be as responsible as we possibly can
within the rules currently in place, then the not so interested government
WILL step in and make things harder for all of us.
I seen posts recently with all sorts of speculation, guesses, critical
observations, and truly useful thoughts and suggestions, I think the
discussion is valid and useful as long as it is the open exchange of ideas
and working towards a common goal of a safe and fun airplane
But, I implore all of you to not give into fear and hysteria while we search
for a cause or problem. Statements like "As far as Yuba City, I'm almost
willing to say case closed." have no place. We only know what we see in one
set of pictures and what limited reports that have been released by the FAA.
Analyzing such a limited data set takes time. The FAA has not stated a
cause, the designer of the aircraft has not sated a cause. The manufacturer
of the kit has not stated a cause, yet some people on this very forum want
to put themselves above all of those knowledgeable and qualified people and
say that there is a problem because they have managed to scrape together
$18000 and buy a kit. It almost makes the statement, "are you an engineer??
No but I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night" seem reasonable.
I absolutely agree that knowledgeable analysis of the situation is required.
The only question is how to get that done.
I would rather take contributions up to send Sabrina to the finest aviation
and engineering schools in the world. Its people like her we need to be
encouraging if we want to be able to pursue our hobby and to pass on the joy
of flight to generations to come. We need younger people to be excited by
piloting you own aircraft, and to be able to afford to do it. Look around
you own EAA Chapters. How many up and comers do you have attending?
FUD Fear Uncertainty Doubt. These are not the characteristics you look for
in a pilot. Seems to me we need to address this before we move on to
metallurgy and tensile strength.
Again, I suggest that the whole purpose of an independent analysis is to
address Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. There may be better ways to address
FUD, but I do not believe that a good way is to pretend that it is not
there. I am open to your suggestions for positive steps to reduce this FUD.
Larry Whitlow
Valparaiso IN
601XL Builder
Pilot since Age 15 Solo'ed on my 16th birthday Dad had to drive me to the
Airport, because I couldn't get my drivers license for another month
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 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
Terry
I'm very happy you read my thoughts and took the time to give me yours.
I know that a solution must be found, and I appreciate yours and the others efforts
to solve this
My big beef is the spread of information. I would be happy to contribute myself
but only if we tell the world (so to speak).
The down sides are still there even if we do tell everyone about the engineers
findings. The best outcome can only come from Zenith doing an exhaustive analysis
along with Zenith having an outside engineer review and concur.
I agree with Larry McFarland I think the root of the current crashes will lie with
the manufacturer. and not a design issue. But the reality is that only Zenith
can put this issue to bed, not us
Thanks for taking the time
Larry Whitlow
> ="Terry Phillips"]Larry
>
> Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I appreciate your thoughts. They deserve
a reply, so I will attempt one. For convenience, I will intersperse my replies
within your comment below
>
> Terry
>
>
>
> 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/ (http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179647#179647
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: I know this guy............... |
Its worth fixing like Steve says. But its not worth grounding the plane until
you do fix it. If that were the case, a lot of Piper Cherokees would be on
the ground now. The method of rigging one of those is to adjust each of the flap
stops. Then you go to the rudder. And then back. It will eventually fly hands
off but just a little slower. The John Thorp designed T-18 uses differential
flap stops set from the cockpit for roll trim. Its happening every where. Good
luck.
Bob
Do not archive
**************
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for
U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Position of trailing edge - Flaps/Aileron |
At 02:58 AM 4/26/2008, you wrote:
>Could please somebody confirm (or disprove) my thoughts.
One thing to consider is the twist built into the ailerons. This
creates a washout which is intended to prevent the tips stalling first.
Paul
XL fuselage
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: | 601XL- how long?- till R.I.P. |
I have been flying a 601HD for 3 years with 300hrs now. It is not smooth in
turbulent air. In fact I get bounced around pretty good in turbulent air.
Probably due to the fact that is is a high lift wing and a light airplane.
Now the HDS wing is probably smoother but it has its trade offs too. Overal
l, the 601HD is a solid airplane and fun to fly...
John
Do not archive
> I actually like the olders designs better, the 601 HD is my favorite. Tho
se
> thick, thick wings skip through turbulant air with very little bumping.
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
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 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: Zenith Builders Analysis Group |
Terry, along with checking for flap or aileron flutter, they should be checking
for flutter of the entire wing too.
[quote="Terry Phillips"]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/ (http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/)
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179660#179660
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: I know this guy.............. |
I thank you all for your thoughts on the misalignment. Its an easy fix.
Its just that in my QBK all the hole were drilled by Zenith. It all justed
bolted together and looked good. Good til I started measuring things....
There is pleanty of tubing area that I can redrill and no need to purchase a
new torque tube.....
SW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: I know this guy..............
>
> Have him check the alignment of the Flap control rod, remember it is three
> pieces that need to be drilled correctly, (the one where most of us tend
> to F--k up on, me included)
> secondly check the alignment of the nylon bushings flap stop, are they
> 5mm both?
> Check that at full up both flaps loct at thhe same setting.
>
>
> Juan
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: steve <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
>>Sent: Apr 27, 2008 2:08 PM
>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Zenith-List: I know this guy..............
>>
>>I know this builder who has checked his flap settings and one flap is not
>>quite the same as the other...it doesnt raise as high as the other.. Its
>>off by about 2 degrees.....
>>"If" I were to talk to him about adjusting them to have each exactly the
>>same, what would I say ??
>>
>>Steve ( name withheld by REQUEST )
>>
>
>
>
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: I know this guy.............. |
No because you can go 90 degrees of the first hole.
might be wise to replace the rod completely to eliminate the chance of the
double hole biting later.
Aerolitellc@aol.com wrote:
I would tell him he needs to re-drill his actuator rod that runs thru the
plane. It sounds like he has one that needs to be rotated slightly and then re-
drill the rod in a different place. It helps if he has a couple of people to
help and hold the flaps all the way up. I drill it and put in a cleco then
check it before I commit to the final bolt hole.
I know this builder who has checked his flap settings and one flap is not
quite the same as the other...it doesnt raise as high as the other.. Its off
by about 2 degrees.....
"If" I were to talk to him about adjusting them to have each exactly the
same, what would I say ??
Steve ( name withheld by REQUEST )
**************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 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: FUEL SYSTEM QUESTION |
Adding a fuel pump may not be so easy.
My O-200 also came off of a C-150. I overhauled the engine and wanted to add a
fuel pump.
The cam installed would not support a fuel pump. It took a different cam/gear
part number. The only one I could find was approx $1300!
That was just the cam. Then I would have needed the pump at another $400. A total
of $1700.
Thinking long and hard-not really. I chose go with two $35 electric pumps.
Bottom line, you need to check the cam part number to see if it will support the
fuel pump.
Floyd
--------
Floyd Wilkes
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179685#179685
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: | Monday Evening Chat Reminder For Digesters |
Please join us for our Monday evening chat room starting around
8:00 PM Eastern Time.
http://www.mykitairplane.com/chat/
George
CH-701 N73EX (Reserved)
Do Not Archive
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: canopy latch cable |
The same type cable is used for brake and shift cables on bicycles.
Check your local bicycle shop to see if they have some you can cut to
length.
>
>
> I'm working on my canopy frame and I need to purchase the canopy
> latch cable. Is this a throttle cable? If so, does someone either
> have a part number or some specs. I've looked at some throttle
> cables on Summit Racing catalog, but not sure what the best length
> would be.
> Dan Dempsey
> Plans building 601XL.
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: | Registration questions E-LSA |
Hello,
I'm planning to build a 601xl with my son but I'm a little confused about a couple
of things that I'm hoping you all can help me to better understand.
Ideally, we would build the plane together then I could use it to teach him how
to fly.
If I understand correctly, to use an LSA as a trainer plane, it must be registered
as S-LSA. However, I believe for it to be S-LSA it must be factory built.
(or meet guidelines of the ASTM? can't remember the acronym) Am I correct on
this? It's not possible (or maybe practical)for us to build an S-LSA in our
garage?
What about E-LSA. I seem to recall reading that an E-LSA can be used to train
the owner. If this is true, perhaps we could be co-owners or I could just put
it in his name from the beginning, but I don't think a zero hour 16 year old
in a homebuilt aircraft will sound very good to an insurance agent. Do any of
you have a similar situation with perhaps training your spouse or children to
fly in an LSA that you can share your experience with me?
Thank you!
Take care,
Dave
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179732#179732
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: The accident versus ready to fly aircraft |
--------
Scott Thatcher, Palm Beach Gardens, FL
601XL with Corvair, Registered as E-LSA
N601EL, http://placestofly.com , EAA203
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179736#179736
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Registration questions E-LSA |
I believe you can receive instruction in any aircraft you have built,
regardless of its classification. The restrictions are on instruction in
planes for hire. Check with the EAA to be sure.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of dstasch
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 8:00 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Registration questions E-LSA
Hello,
I'm planning to build a 601xl with my son but I'm a little confused about a
couple of things that I'm hoping you all can help me to better understand.
Ideally, we would build the plane together then I could use it to teach him
how to fly.
If I understand correctly, to use an LSA as a trainer plane, it must be
registered as S-LSA. However, I believe for it to be S-LSA it must be
factory built. (or meet guidelines of the ASTM? can't remember the acronym)
Am I correct on this? It's not possible (or maybe practical)for us to build
an S-LSA in our garage?
What about E-LSA. I seem to recall reading that an E-LSA can be used to
train the owner. If this is true, perhaps we could be co-owners or I could
just put it in his name from the beginning, but I don't think a zero hour 16
year old in a homebuilt aircraft will sound very good to an insurance agent.
Do any of you have a similar situation with perhaps training your spouse or
children to fly in an LSA that you can share your experience with me?
Thank you!
Take care,
Dave
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179732#179732
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: Registration questions E-LSA |
Hi Dave,
I don't have all the answers you seek, but may be able to help get you started.
First, you can't build an S-LSA. That has to be factory
built. Theoretically you could build an E-LSA, but in practice that
can't really be done today either since no factories I know of offer
E-LSA kits. There is some way to convert an S-LSA to E-LSA, but that
starts with a factory built plane too.
If you build any plane from a kit, the only way to get it properly
licensed is using an Experimental-Amateur Built airworthiness
certificate. That means it can't be used for hire, but there are
some ways to allow flight training in an E-AB plane. I don't know
the details, but one of the serious restrictions is the instructor
must agree to teach in the particular plane. You should talk to a
couple of instructors (preferably ones you learn about at your local
EAA chapter who are familiar with this issue) and see what their
requirements are. I suspect you will find a need for functional dual
controls, dual brakes, and other equipment requirements.
About insurance, some more leg work on your part is in order. My own
experience is the insurance companies are pretty agreeable to
insuring Zodiacs, but they want a certain amount of experience by
each pilot listed to be PIC. I'm sure any insurance agent can give
you more information on the specific needs for training a student
pilot in an E-AB Zodiac.
Good luck,
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive
At 07:00 PM 4/27/2008, you wrote:
>If I understand correctly, to use an LSA as a trainer plane, it must
>be registered as S-LSA. However, I believe for it to be S-LSA it
>must be factory built. (or meet guidelines of the ASTM? can't
>remember the acronym) Am I correct on this? It's not possible (or
>maybe practical)for us to build an S-LSA in our garage?
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: Registration questions E-LSA |
Your 601XL would have to be registered as an Experimental.
There are two ways an experimental can be used for training, and
neither probably apply to your situation.
If you are the owner, you can receive training in your own plane.
An Experimental can also be used for transition training. You must
get permission from the FAA for this on a case by case basis.
Transition training means you aren't training for a new certificate,
just familiarity with the plane.
Also, be aware that there is a 40 hour test flight period where no
passengers may be carried. This basically means that if you plan on
taking lessons in you own plane, you must get someone else to fly it
for 40 hours before you are permitted to even be a passenger. After
the 40 hours "fly off", you my receive training in your own plane.
There is lots of much more authoritative information at eaa.org.
There are a few schools that use the factory build 601xl SLSA where
it's possible to get training
Ron
On Apr 27, 2008, at 10:00 PM, dstasch wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm planning to build a 601xl with my son but I'm a little confused
> about a couple of things that I'm hoping you all can help me to
> better understand.
>
> Ideally, we would build the plane together then I could use it to
> teach him how to fly.
>
> If I understand correctly, to use an LSA as a trainer plane, it
> must be registered as S-LSA. However, I believe for it to be S-LSA
> it must be factory built. (or meet guidelines of the ASTM? can't
> remember the acronym) Am I correct on this? It's not possible (or
> maybe practical)for us to build an S-LSA in our garage?
>
> What about E-LSA. I seem to recall reading that an E-LSA can be
> used to train the owner. If this is true, perhaps we could be co-
> owners or I could just put it in his name from the beginning, but I
> don't think a zero hour 16 year old in a homebuilt aircraft will
> sound very good to an insurance agent. Do any of you have a
> similar situation with perhaps training your spouse or children to
> fly in an LSA that you can share your experience with me?
>
> Thank you!
>
> Take care,
> Dave
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179732#179732
>
>
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: Registration questions E-LSA |
If you are building a CH 601 XL, you will have to build it as an
experimental amateur built. An S-LSA must be factory built and the E-
LSA option is no longer available for this aircraft since the "fat
ultralight" exception expired this January. Even though you can't
register the airplane as any sort of LSA, as long as the aircraft
falls within the limitations of the LSA rules, it can still be
operated by a sport pilot under the LSA rules.
You can receive training in an E-AB, you can give training in an E-AB,
you can pay for instruction in an E-AB, you just can't rent out the
airplane itself for training. You can receive training in any aircraft
that you own, regardless of its classification, as long as the
instructor will agree to train in that aircraft. If you are a CFI, you
should have no problem teaching your son to fly in your 601 XL. As far
as insurance goes, I have no idea how that will be handled, it will
depend on the insurance company. Just tell your son not to crash into
anything expensive. ;)
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm planning to build a 601xl with my son but I'm a little confused
> about a couple of things that I'm hoping you all can help me to
> better understand.
>
> Ideally, we would build the plane together then I could use it to
> teach him how to fly.
>
> If I understand correctly, to use an LSA as a trainer plane, it must
> be registered as S-LSA. However, I believe for it to be S-LSA it
> must be factory built. (or meet guidelines of the ASTM? can't
> remember the acronym) Am I correct on this? It's not possible (or
> maybe practical)for us to build an S-LSA in our garage?
>
> What about E-LSA. I seem to recall reading that an E-LSA can be
> used to train the owner. If this is true, perhaps we could be co-
> owners or I could just put it in his name from the beginning, but I
> don't think a zero hour 16 year old in a homebuilt aircraft will
> sound very good to an insurance agent. Do any of you have a similar
> situation with perhaps training your spouse or children to fly in an
> LSA that you can share your experience with me?
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
Message 53
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Registration questions E-LSA |
Wow, thank you for all your quick responses!
There's no question that we want to build, and now that I understand we will be
building under the E-AB category, I'll go through and read the regs again. It
should be a little less inundating now that I know what we're building ;)
I don't have an Instructor rating but I do have the required hours and I don't
mind doing the CFI training for the opportunity to teach my son.
As for the 40 hour test flight period, my plan is (or was if it's not a good plan
:) to find a 601xl at a nearby school to get acquainted with and do the flight
testing myself. If there's not a 601 available locally, I'm not too from
Missouri, so I could go there for some training at Zenith.
Finally, as for not having my son not crash into anything expensive, I've been
working on this with his driver's license for the past six months and every time
I look in the mirror, I try to convince myself that the new gray hairs are
just a coincidence :)
Thanks again, this is a wonderful group!
Take care,
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=179751#179751
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! --
|