Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:19 AM - Re: Spreading fear about the XL (mcjon77)
2. 05:21 AM - Re: Spreading fear about the XL (steveadams)
3. 07:16 AM - Re: Re: Spreading fear about the XL (Leo Gates)
4. 07:20 AM - Re: Re: Spreading fear about the XL (Dirk Zahtilla)
5. 08:08 AM - Re: 601XL passenger seat and baggage shelf dimensions? (steve)
6. 12:03 PM - Re: Spreading fear about the XL (Gig Giacona)
7. 12:28 PM - Lets look at the specs (Dirk Zahtilla)
8. 12:29 PM - Re: Spreading fear about the XL (Gig Giacona)
9. 01:07 PM - Re: Re: Spreading fear about the XL (wade jones)
10. 01:13 PM - Re: Lets look at the specs (Gig Giacona)
11. 01:49 PM - From the Ground Up... the adventure continues! (Grant Corriveau)
12. 01:49 PM - Re: Re: Lets look at the specs (Juan Vega)
13. 01:51 PM - Re: Lets look at the specs (Juan Vega)
14. 01:52 PM - Re: Lets look at the specs (Bryan Martin)
15. 01:53 PM - Re: Re: Spreading fear about the XL (Juan Vega)
16. 01:54 PM - Re: Re: Spreading fear about the XL (japhillipsga@aol.com)
17. 03:02 PM - Re: [Probable Spam] Re: Re: Spreading fear about the XL (LarryMcFarland)
18. 04:53 PM - Re: Re: Spreading fear about the XL (Roger & Lina Hill)
19. 05:02 PM - Re: Lets look at the specs (Roger & Lina Hill)
20. 06:22 PM - 601XL Aileron Balance Fairleads (John Smith)
21. 07:10 PM - machine screws (Carlos Sa)
22. 07:23 PM - Re: machine screws (wade jones)
23. 07:43 PM - Re: From the Ground Up... the adventure continues! (Ron Lendon)
24. 07:52 PM - [Probable Spam] Re: Spreading fear about the XL (Ron Lendon)
25. 08:23 PM - Re: 601XL Aileron Balance Fairleads (Craig Payne)
26. 10:34 PM - Re: machine screws (Paul Mulwitz)
27. 10:40 PM - Re: machine screws (Terry Phillips)
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
hills(at)sunflower.com wrote:
> ..I should clear up a couple of thing, my 601 HDS does have push rods to the
> ailerons, so the design does differ from the newer 601XL. I note this
> because apparently the older models have not had any flutter issues, well
> none that I know about anyway.
> --
Just so I can get some clarification, was the switch from pushrods to cables something
that happened with the introduction of the XL model? Did both the 601
HDS and 601 HD have pushrods instead?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216182#216182
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
Just to correct what someone said in an earlier post; the CH640 uses cables, not
pushrods on all controls. The 640 rudder and stabilator are balanced, the ailerons
are not.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216187#216187
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
My 601HDS has cables, built to 2001 plans.
--
Leo Gates
N601Z - CH601HDS TDO
Rotax 912UL
mcjon77 wrote:
>
>
> hills(at)sunflower.com wrote:
>
>> ..I should clear up a couple of thing, my 601 HDS does have push rods to the
>> ailerons, so the design does differ from the newer 601XL. I note this
>> because apparently the older models have not had any flutter issues, well
>> none that I know about anyway.
>> --
>>
>
>
> Just so I can get some clarification, was the switch from pushrods to cables
something that happened with the introduction of the XL model? Did both the 601
HDS and 601 HD have pushrods instead?
>
>
>
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
OOPs,
I misread the following from the 640 aileron control description. "They are
connected to push/pull rods which are connected to a simple bellcrank in the
wing." I failed to read the last half "Control cables are connected between
the bellcrank and the fuselage torque tube"
Dirk Z
----- Original Message -----
From: "steveadams" <dr_steve_adams@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 5:20 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Spreading fear about the XL
>
> Just to correct what someone said in an earlier post; the CH640 uses
> cables, not pushrods on all controls. The 640 rudder and stabilator are
> balanced, the ailerons are not.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216187#216187
>
>
>
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: 601XL passenger seat and baggage shelf dimensions? |
Excellent timming. I have a horse that I need to be transfered from
Phoenix to San Diego. Can you help ???
S
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Maynard" <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 5:15 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 601XL passenger seat and baggage shelf dimensions?
>
> I've volunteered my airplane for Animal Rescue Flights missions, to fly
> animals in need of transportation. (Check them out at
> http://aviation.meetup.com/95/ .) In order to let them know what to
> expect,
> I need to know the dimensions of the passenger seat, and the baggage
> shelf,
> of my Zodiac, so I can let them know how big a crate I can handle. Anyone
> have the numbers handy, to save me a trip to the airport? Thanks.
> --
> Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL http://www.conmicro.com
> http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
> Fairmont, MN (KFRM) (Yes, that's me!)
> AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC http://www.tronguy.net/N55ZC.shtml
>
>
>
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
Bill your quote below concerns me. I've been doing quite a bit of research on this
in several places and can't find for the life of me any place what shows that
cables such as the ones we use should be able to stretch this much.
Are you certain that there isn't something bent in that wing?
JAPhillipsGA(at)aol.com wrote:
> [SNIP] When I checked the tension last week after reading the AMD letter and
buying a tenisonometer the aileron cables were at 17 pounds. They are set correctly
now. Best regards, Bill
>
>
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216237#216237
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: | Lets look at the specs |
Per Juan Vega:
> pull up the archives, i brought up the issue of VNE and Max
manauvering speeds over one year ago, but the back room engineers
ignored it.
>
> Fly it and follow the specs. My guess is the guys flying and that
augered in ignored the flight envelope of the aircraft. BUILD IT TO
PLANS AND FLY IT TO SPECS.
Ok. The zenith website listssome specs for the XL and now the 650as:
Max cruise @sea level 138 mph
75% cruise @8000' 160 mph
VNE 180 mph
G load (ultimate) +/- 6 g
However when I received my plans the VNE is listed as 160 mph
this is an excerpt from the specs page:
Vigorous performance:
"My evaluation of cruise speed showed about 140 mph at 2800-2900 rpm,
however, the company plans a different prop for Sport Pilot.
If we look at these numbers and keep in mind that part of testing a
newly built aircraft is to prove these numbers, how many of you feel
safe taking your XL up to 180 mph?
How about the g load testing. At +/- 6 that should mean a safe limit of
+/- 4 (why doesn't zenith state this) with a 50% margin. would you feel
safe at a +4g steep turn? A typical loop produces about 3.8 to 4 gs How
about inverted pushing up at -4g?
How do we decide whether VNE is 160 or 180. if it's 160 what about this
75% cruise of 160.
I'm sorry but something is wrong here and we deserve factual answers,
not this garbage expecting blind faith. I'm building my XL. I like
almost everything about the design, but I will gladly sacrifice an extra
50lbs. of weight making it seriously strong. When the day comes that I
fly it for the first time I want to know without reservation that it
isn't coming apart, period.
Dirk Z
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
Roger,
Did you build your HDS or purchase it? I ask because I'm pretty sure the cables
were always used on all versions of the 601. Though push rods have been added
by some builders.
hills(at)sunflower.com wrote:
>
> I should clear up a couple of thing, my 601 HDS does have push rods to the
> ailerons, so the design does differ from the newer 601XL. I note this
> because apparently the older models have not had any flutter issues, well
> none that I know about anyway.
>
--------
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=216241#216241
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
I think you are correct Gig , IMHO it would take much more pressure than we
are capable of using our hands only to stretch these 1/8" 2000# cables .
Tony Bingelis (one of my heroes) also shares the theory that cables do not
stretch , in our planes the fairleads can become worn and may need to be
tensioned from time to time .
Wade Jones South Texas
601XL Franklin 0-235
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 2:02 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Spreading fear about the XL
>
> Bill your quote below concerns me. I've been doing quite a bit of research
> on this in several places and can't find for the life of me any place what
> shows that cables such as the ones we use should be able to stretch this
> much.
>
> Are you certain that there isn't something bent in that wing?
>
>
> JAPhillipsGA(at)aol.com wrote:
>> [SNIP] When I checked the tension last week after reading the AMD letter
>> and buying a tenisonometer the aileron cables were at 17 pounds. They are
>> set correctly now. Best regards, Bill
>>
>>
>
>
> --------
> W.R. "Gig" Giacona
> 601XL Under Construction
> See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216237#216237
>
>
>
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: Lets look at the specs |
[quote="ideaz1(at)sbcglobal.net"]Per Juan Vega:
Ok. The zenith website listssome specs for the XL and now the 650as:
Max cruise @sea level 138 mph
75% cruise @8000' 160 mph
VNE 180 mph
G load (ultimate) +/- 6 g
However when I received my plans the VNE is listed as 160 mph
this is an excerpt from the specs page:
Vigorous performance:
"My evaluation of cruise speed showed about 140 mph at 2800-2900 rpm, however,
the company plans a different prop for Sport Pilot.
If we look at these numbers and keep in mind that part of testing a newly built
aircraft is to prove these numbers, how many of you feel safe taking your
XL up to 180 mph?
How about the g load testing. At +/- 6 that should mean a safe limit of +/- 4
(why doesn't zenith state this) with a 50% margin. would you feel safe at a
+4g steep turn? A typical loop produces about 3.8 to 4 gs How about inverted
pushing up at -4g?
How do we decide whether VNE is 160 or 180. if it's 160 what about this 75% cruise
of 160.
I'm sorry but something is wrong here and we deserve factual answers, not this
garbage expecting blind faith. I'm building my XL. I like almost everything
about the design, but I will gladly sacrifice an extra 50lbs. of weight making
it seriously strong. When the day comes that I fly it for the first time I
want to know without reservation that it isn't coming apart, period.
Dirk Z
> [b]
That 160 @ 8000' is TAS not IAS.
Ultimate means Ultimate
If you want factual answers regarding the accidents then you are going to have
to wait until the FAA and NTSB finish the reports and then the answers still might
not be there.
Even in certified aircraft there are accidents that don't get fully explained.
In our situation there may not be a design issue that can be singled out. It might
well be a repeatable building issue of the type that will be made by one
out of x number of builders and it is at a point where the evidence of it doesn't
remain after a crash. It all boils down to the fact that the FAA/NTSB/some
random European aviation agency might not have an answer.
There is one FACT that we do know. There are lots of 601XLs out there flying there
little hearts out and hundreds of them have not had a problem.
--------
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=216246#216246
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: | From the Ground Up... the adventure continues! |
"... but I did not have a tensionometer and in fact I don't remember
if I knew then what the correct setting should have been..."
The following is in no way meant to criticize the author of this
comment. It is typical of some of the extra challenges we
homebuilders face.
Rather I want to point out that Zenair was (in my case circa 2000) of
limited help in the area of making the transition from building to
flying their aircraft for the first time and maintaining it there
after. Why this should be is a matter open to discussion and the
word "liability" for products they did not construct, has a lot to do
with it, I bet.
For example, my HDS had no data specified anywhere in the plans or
construction manual about what is the correct setting for control
cable tension. Because I was an experienced pilot at the time, I
knew enough to ask. But this shouldn't have been necessary.
Likewise, now that I'm flying my aircraft, I depend mainly on fellow
builders to figure out things like the maintenance schedule for the
aircraft (in detail - not just "check the wings; check the fuselage;
etc..). I have had to figure out my own procedures (still am) for
items like replacing landing gear bungee chords (you XL builders will
miss out on this lovely chore). Information about necessary and
useful places to cut inspection holes to check internal parts and so
on was not mentioned anywhere. Again, it is the now-flying builder
community that I depend on for much of this. Likewise what should be
checked for critical conditions of bolts, engine mounts, the engine
itself, etc. etc. This is up to "we the builders" to figure out and
accomplish using various resources.
Compared to other consumer-oriented vehicles these problems are
somewhat peculiar to homebuilt airplanes. Zenair has liability
issues to consider every time they even think about extending
customer support into such areas. Basically, I'm guessing they limit
themselves as much as possible to helping us get it built. After
that we're pretty much on our own. I've always found the Zenair
folks helpful when I contact them, but we don't have the same level
of factory-produced support information and service (i.e. manuals and
checklists) as we do for these other vehicles I mentioned. My
workshop (and yours) IS the factory.
So the message I want to convey to all those still in the building
process, or getting ready for the first flight. Don't make the
mistake of thinking that once you've built it, it's finished and you
can "just use it" like other consumer vehicles. You can't. You
alone are responsible for figuring out how to get it flying and keep
it flying SAFELY.
Just a word to the wise based on my own realizations over the years.
Fly Safe!
Grant Corriveau
601HDS GHTF
-----------------------------
The Wings Stayed On!
-----------------------------
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: Lets look at the specs |
Gig, the big number everyone keeps missing, is Max manauvering- only 103.
You cannot yank and bank at full gross over the Max manauvering. The rest is moot.
G load is utility at predetermine weights again not an ecuse to fly at max
speed at Max load and do 6 gs.
There are alot of short time piloits on here that I think fall in the trap thinking
great 6 gs max load 1320 two dudes and full fuel , lets yank and bank. There
are quite a few 601s flying and someone is bound to 1- do a crap job of keeping
the mainentance up (cable tension and torquing)
2- build not to specs.
3- fly out of specs.
I gues what I am saying is build you plane to specs, and fly it to specs, and make
sure you know the real limitations (e.i max gross at each speed factor).
EVEN AN EXTRA 300 L WHICH I FLY HAS A WEIGHT LIMIT AND FUEL LIMT FOR YANKING AND
BANKING.
No conspiracies here in my book.
Lets move on.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Gig Giacona <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
>Sent: Nov 25, 2008 4:13 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Lets look at the specs
>
>
>[quote="ideaz1(at)sbcglobal.net"]Per Juan Vega:
>
> Ok. The zenith website listssome specs for the XL and now the 650as:
> Max cruise @sea level 138 mph
> 75% cruise @8000' 160 mph
> VNE 180 mph
> G load (ultimate) +/- 6 g
>
> However when I received my plans the VNE is listed as 160 mph
>
> this is an excerpt from the specs page:
> Vigorous performance:
>"My evaluation of cruise speed showed about 140 mph at 2800-2900 rpm, however,
the company plans a different prop for Sport Pilot.
>
> If we look at these numbers and keep in mind that part of testing a newly built
aircraft is to prove these numbers, how many of you feel safe taking your
XL up to 180 mph?
>
> How about the g load testing. At +/- 6 that should mean a safe limit of +/-
4 (why doesn't zenith state this) with a 50% margin. would you feel safe at a
+4g steep turn? A typical loop produces about 3.8 to 4 gs How about inverted
pushing up at -4g?
>
> How do we decide whether VNE is 160 or 180. if it's 160 what about this 75%
cruise of 160.
>
> I'm sorry but something is wrong here and we deserve factual answers, not this
garbage expecting blind faith. I'm building my XL. I like almost everything
about the design, but I will gladly sacrifice an extra 50lbs. of weight making
it seriously strong. When the day comes that I fly it for the first time
I want to know without reservation that it isn't coming apart, period.
>
> Dirk Z
>
>> [b]
>
>
>That 160 @ 8000' is TAS not IAS.
>
>Ultimate means Ultimate
>
>If you want factual answers regarding the accidents then you are going to have
to wait until the FAA and NTSB finish the reports and then the answers still
might not be there.
>
>Even in certified aircraft there are accidents that don't get fully explained.
In our situation there may not be a design issue that can be singled out. It
might well be a repeatable building issue of the type that will be made by one
out of x number of builders and it is at a point where the evidence of it doesn't
remain after a crash. It all boils down to the fact that the FAA/NTSB/some
random European aviation agency might not have an answer.
>
>There is one FACT that we do know. There are lots of 601XLs out there flying there
little hearts out and hundreds of them have not had a problem.
>
>--------
>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=216246#216246
>
>
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: Lets look at the specs |
Max Manauvering Speed is 103mph IAS. This is a differnt number than Vne,
everyone keeps missing that, i dont know why. There rest is moot.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Dirk Zahtilla <ideaz1@sbcglobal.net>
>Sent: Nov 25, 2008 3:18 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Lets look at the specs
>
>
>Per Juan Vega:
>> pull up the archives, i brought up the issue of VNE and Max manauvering speeds
over one year ago, but the back room engineers ignored it.
>>
>> Fly it and follow the specs. My guess is the guys flying and that augered in
ignored the flight envelope of the aircraft. BUILD IT TO PLANS AND FLY IT TO
SPECS.
>
>Ok. The zenith website listssome specs for the XL and now the 650as:
>Max cruise @sea level 138 mph
>75% cruise @8000' 160 mph
>VNE 180 mph
>G load (ultimate) +/- 6 g
>
>However when I received my plans the VNE is listed as 160 mph
>
>this is an excerpt from the specs page:
>Vigorous performance:
>"My evaluation of cruise speed showed about 140 mph at 2800-2900 rpm, however,
the company plans a different prop for Sport Pilot.
>
>If we look at these numbers and keep in mind that part of testing a newly built
aircraft is to prove these numbers, how many of you feel safe taking your XL
up to 180 mph?
>
>How about the g load testing. At +/- 6 that should mean a safe limit of +/- 4
(why doesn't zenith state this) with a 50% margin. would you feel safe at a +4g
steep turn? A typical loop produces about 3.8 to 4 gs How about inverted pushing
up at -4g?
>
>How do we decide whether VNE is 160 or 180. if it's 160 what about this 75% cruise
of 160.
>
>I'm sorry but something is wrong here and we deserve factual answers, not this
garbage expecting blind faith. I'm building my XL. I like almost everything about
the design, but I will gladly sacrifice an extra 50lbs. of weight making
it seriously strong. When the day comes that I fly it for the first time I want
to know without reservation that it isn't coming apart, period.
>
>Dirk Z
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lets look at the specs |
I would feel quite save flying my 601 XL to 180 mph or pulling 4 Gs at
gross weight. I've done that in phase 1 testing. I've never pulled -4
gs, mainly because I don't have inverted fuel or oil systems installed
and don't particularly like standing on my head. The way the wing
attachments are designed, if they will take +4 g, there's no reason
they won't take -4. I don't have a G meter installed now so I would be
leery doing high G maneuvers, but pushing it to Vne in smooth air
wouldn't worry me much.
Vne is stated in CAS. When somebody states 75% cruise speed at 8,000
feet, you can assume they are talking about TAS. Under standard
conditions, 160 mph TAS at 8000 feet equates to 138 mph CAS, so you
are still a long way from the 160 mph Vne.
On Nov 25, 2008, at 3:18 PM, Dirk Zahtilla wrote:
>
> Ok. The zenith website listssome specs for the XL and now the 650as:
> Max cruise @sea level 138 mph
> 75% cruise @8000' 160 mph
> VNE 180 mph
> G load (ultimate) +/- 6 g
>
> However when I received my plans the VNE is listed as 160 mph
>
> this is an excerpt from the specs page:
> Vigorous performance:
> "My evaluation of cruise speed showed about 140 mph at 2800-2900
> rpm, however, the company plans a different prop for Sport Pilot.
>
> If we look at these numbers and keep in mind that part of testing a
> newly built aircraft is to prove these numbers, how many of you feel
> safe taking your XL up to 180 mph?
>
> How about the g load testing. At +/- 6 that should mean a safe limit
> of +/- 4 (why doesn't zenith state this) with a 50% margin. would
> you feel safe at a +4g steep turn? A typical loop produces about 3.8
> to 4 gs How about inverted pushing up at -4g?
>
> How do we decide whether VNE is 160 or 180. if it's 160 what about
> this 75% cruise of 160.
>
> I'm sorry but something is wrong here and we deserve factual
> answers, not this garbage expecting blind faith. I'm building my XL.
> I like almost everything about the design, but I will gladly
> sacrifice an extra 50lbs. of weight making it seriously strong. When
> the day comes that I fly it for the first time I want to know
> without reservation that it isn't coming apart, period.
>
> Dirk Z
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Spreading fear about the XL |
Gig, cables do stretch all the time, then they set. quite trying to extrapolate
some solution, just check them, i do it on piper cubs, on cessnas, and keep
in mind maunuvering speed is differnt than Max cruise relative to gross weight.
-----Original Message-----
>From: Gig Giacona <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
>Sent: Nov 25, 2008 3:02 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Spreading fear about the XL
>
>
>Bill your quote below concerns me. I've been doing quite a bit of research on
this in several places and can't find for the life of me any place what shows
that cables such as the ones we use should be able to stretch this much.
>
>Are you certain that there isn't something bent in that wing?
>
>
>JAPhillipsGA(at)aol.com wrote:
>> [SNIP] When I checked the tension last week after reading the AMD letter and
buying a tenisonometer the aileron cables were at 17 pounds. They are set correctly
now. Best regards, Bill
>>
>>
>
>
>--------
>W.R. "Gig" Giacona
>601XL Under Construction
>See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216237#216237
>
>
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
Gig, the great probability is that other than when first set by the AMD guy they
never have been correct or even anywhere near correct. I had a landing 2 years
ago next March in a 20 knot + crosswind landing that ballooned up even with
full aileron pitch down on the wing and to save it I fought the stick and bumped
the throttle and got it down. I know I stretched the cables then because I
also bent some stuff I had to replace. When I reattached the cables and reset
the tension, but?it was without a meter. If you set the cables you will find
that about one turn of the turnbuckle is 10-15 pounds and I don't believe anybody
can tell much difference between 20 and 30 pounds by touch. Best regards,
Bill.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gig Giacona <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
Sent: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 3:02 pm
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Spreading fear about the XL
Bill your quote below concerns me. I've been doing quite a bit of research on
this in several places and can't find for the life of me any place what shows
that cables such as the ones we use should be able to stretch this much.
Are you certain that there isn't something bent in that wing?
JAPhillipsGA(at)aol.com wrote:
> [SNIP] When I checked the tension last week after reading the AMD letter and
buying a tenisonometer the aileron cables were at 17 pounds. They are set
correctly now. Best regards, Bill
>
>
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216237#216237
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
Hi Guys,
This week, I tensioned my cables as the last thing done for the annual
inspection and they were near 10 -15 lbs by the gage I made for the task.
While adjusting the turnbuckles, I increased the tension to 15 rudder,
20 elevator and 25 for the ailerons. I believe you confuse stretching
with pulling
the cable taut or perfectly straight, which will not happen unless you
reach some ungodly tension that breaks things. At 25 lbs, the cables for my
ailerons is still able to move and do not act like a guitar string.
Anything past 30 lbs the ribs will deflect to some degree and I would
worry about
the deflection turning into bending and excessive wear on the bell crank
bearings. I had to replace the bushings at the rudder this year after
125 hours.
Larry McFarland 601`HDS at www.macsmachine.com
japhillipsga@aol.com wrote:
> Gig, the great probability is that other than when first set by the
> AMD guy they never have been correct or even anywhere near correct. I
> had a landing 2 years ago next March in a 20 knot + crosswind landing
> that ballooned up even with full aileron pitch down on the wing and to
> save it I fought the stick and bumped the throttle and got it down. I
> know I stretched the cables then because I also bent some stuff I had
> to replace. When I reattached the cables and reset the tension, but it
> was without a meter. If you set the cables you will find that about
> one turn of the turnbuckle is 10-15 pounds and I don't believe anybody
> can tell much difference between 20 and 30 pounds by touch. Best
> regards, Bill.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gig Giacona <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 3:02 pm
> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Spreading fear about the XL
>
>
> Bill your quote below concerns me. I've been doing quite a bit of research on
> this in several places and can't find for the life of me any place what shows
> that cables such as the ones we use should be able to stretch this much.
>
> Are you certain that there isn't something bent in that wing?
>
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: Spreading fear about the XL |
Howdy all;
I bought my 601HDS from the original builder, then changed the engine to a
100 HP water cooled head VW engine. Looking at the wing bell crank, it does
indeed have a single push rod. The bell crank has a place for cables to
attached, but no cables.Hummm,,,
Works good though, I also have hinged alerions and turning them down a bit
gives me a stall speed of 50mph.
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gig Giacona
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 2:29 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Spreading fear about the XL
Roger,
Did you build your HDS or purchase it? I ask because I'm pretty sure the
cables were always used on all versions of the 601. Though push rods have
been added by some builders.
hills(at)sunflower.com wrote:
>
> I should clear up a couple of thing, my 601 HDS does have push rods to the
> ailerons, so the design does differ from the newer 601XL. I note this
> because apparently the older models have not had any flutter issues, well
> none that I know about anyway.
>
--------
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=216241#216241
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: | Lets look at the specs |
Howdy all,
I called Zenith a year back to ask about how they determine the vne of their
planes. I was told that the speed assigned was the speed that the
plane has been tested to in flight (at sea level), and not an actual
"failure speed", which they don't have a way of determining and don't test
too.
Also, regarding the 6g design load, both Zenith and Sonex told me the same
thing, the wings on the HD and the Sonex are designed to an ultimate of 9
g's ,
So technically they are aerobatic category stressed, but for legal reasons
they don't state this in writing as they don't want folks doing aerobatic
maneuvers in them.
Note: The HD does stand for Heavy Duty.
I register my 601 HDS as "Utility" class after I swapped out the engine.
Roger
_____
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dirk Zahtilla
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 2:19 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Lets look at the specs
Per Juan Vega:
> pull up the archives, i brought up the issue of VNE and Max manauvering
speeds over one year ago, but the back room engineers ignored it.
>
> Fly it and follow the specs. My guess is the guys flying and that augered
in ignored the flight envelope of the aircraft. BUILD IT TO PLANS AND FLY
IT TO SPECS.
Ok. The zenith website listssome specs for the XL and now the 650as:
Max cruise @sea level 138 mph
75% cruise @8000' 160 mph
VNE 180 mph
G load (ultimate) +/- 6 g
However when I received my plans the VNE is listed as 160 mph
this is an excerpt from the specs page:
Vigorous performance:
"My evaluation of cruise speed showed about 140 mph at 2800-2900 rpm,
however, the company plans a different prop for Sport Pilot.
If we look at these numbers and keep in mind that part of testing a newly
built aircraft is to prove these numbers, how many of you feel safe taking
your XL up to 180 mph?
How about the g load testing. At +/- 6 that should mean a safe limit of +/-
4 (why doesn't zenith state this) with a 50% margin. would you feel safe at
a +4g steep turn? A typical loop produces about 3.8 to 4 gs How about
inverted pushing up at -4g?
How do we decide whether VNE is 160 or 180. if it's 160 what about this 75%
cruise of 160.
I'm sorry but something is wrong here and we deserve factual answers, not
this garbage expecting blind faith. I'm building my XL. I like almost
everything about the design, but I will gladly sacrifice an extra 50lbs. of
weight making it seriously strong. When the day comes that I fly it for the
first time I want to know without reservation that it isn't coming apart,
period.
Dirk Z
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: | 601XL Aileron Balance Fairleads |
I installed the aileron middle balance fairlead and ready to install the ou
ter aileron balance fairleads.- Per plan 6-B-22, FOUR outer aileron balan
ce fairleads are required with slotted-#20 holes in the middle.- Two ar
e installed on the forward side skins and two on back seat support (6B5-1).
- Either I am slow today (confuse?) or he people at Zenith do not deserve
a passing grade, but here are my questions:=0A=0A1.- How on earth can I
install slotted fairleads to back support without adding L-angle similar to
the middle aileron balance fairlead?- Where is the L-angle drawing?=0A2.
- What is the distance between the side skin and balance fairleads that
-attach to the back seat support?=0A3.- At the very bottom right of pla
n 6-B-22, two non-drilled 30X60mm faileads are required.- What are those
fairleads, where are they installed,-and why aren't they allocated on the
fairlead board templates?=0A4.- Six slotted aileron fairleads (four on a
ileron balance cable & two on aileron cables) have safety wires tied to ope
n slotted ends-to prevent aileron cables from "jumping" out of the slots,
and I suppose the aileron cables should not be rubbing-on the safety wir
es under normal operating condition.- So how do I orient each open slotte
d aileron fairlead to minimize aileron cables from rubbing against safety w
ires?=0A=0AThanks.=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
Hello, all
I am looking for some information: I am using machine screws MS51959 6-32
thread ( http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/ms51959.php ) to
fasten an access panel to its frame.
The frame has several anchor nuts K-1100-06 ( near the bottom of
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/anchornuts.php ).
I find that the Phillips head in general doesn't last long - I much prefer
the ones with a square (Robertson drive) or hex hole.
Do such screws exist? (i.e., 82 degrees head, 6-32 thread with a square or
hex head)
Thanks in advance
Carlos
CH601-HD, plans
Milestone: found a place for the right wing in the garage and hung it.
Left wing should join it before the holidays (yeah, right....)
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: machine screws |
Hi Carlos ,I bought some 6-32 square hole for counter sinking ,I do not
know the degree of the head .You can call Brazos fasteners at
979-265-8631 they have a big stock .
Wade Jones South Texas
601XL Franklin 0-235
----- Original Message -----
From: Carlos Sa
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 9:09 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: machine screws
Hello, all
I am looking for some information: I am using machine screws MS51959
6-32 thread ( http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/ms51959.php
) to fasten an access panel to its frame.
The frame has several anchor nuts K-1100-06 ( near the bottom of
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/anchornuts.php ).
I find that the Phillips head in general doesn't last long - I much
prefer the ones with a square (Robertson drive) or hex hole.
Do such screws exist? (i.e., 82 degrees head, 6-32 thread with a
square or hex head)
Thanks in advance
Carlos
CH601-HD, plans
Milestone: found a place for the right wing in the garage and hung it.
Left wing should join it before the holidays (yeah, right....)
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: From the Ground Up... the adventure continues! |
That type of support is supposed to happen here. We are the manufactures of our
airplanes. Methods, tips and tricks should be the main types of postings here.
I'm almost sure that will be the case once we realize our responsibilities.
I do believe many conversations are taking place offline because of the peer pressure
and flame throwing we see. That's OK but the whole community suffers from
it.
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216279#216279
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: [Probable Spam] Re: Spreading fear about the XL |
Larry,
It was never my intention to intimate using the airframe to stretch the cables
like guitar strings. I will fixture something on my work table when I get to
that point. The cables will be pre-stretched before assembly.
Hope that clarifies things,
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=216280#216280
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: | 601XL Aileron Balance Fairleads |
I'm not certain the attached photos will help. But this is how my Oct-2007
vintage quick-build-kit was done.
-- Craig
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Smith
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 7:21 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: 601XL Aileron Balance Fairleads
I installed the aileron middle balance fairlead and ready to install the
outer aileron balance fairleads. Per plan 6-B-22, FOUR outer aileron
balance fairleads are required with slotted #20 holes in the middle. Two
are installed on the forward side skins and two on back seat support
(6B5-1). Either I am slow today (confuse?) or he people at Zenith do not
deserve a passing grade, but here are my questions:
1. How on earth can I install slotted fairleads to back support without
adding L-angle similar to the middle aileron balance fairlead? Where is the
L-angle drawing?
2. What is the distance between the side skin and balance fairleads that
attach to the back seat support?
3. At the very bottom right of plan 6-B-22, two non-drilled 30X60mm
faileads are required. What are those fairleads, where are they installed,
and why aren't they allocated on the fairlead board templates?
4. Six slotted aileron fairleads (four on aileron balance cable & two on
aileron cables) have safety wires tied to open slotted ends to prevent
aileron cables from "jumping" out of the slots, and I suppose the aileron
cables should not be rubbing on the safety wires under normal operating
condition. So how do I orient each open slotted aileron fairlead to
minimize aileron cables from rubbing against safety wires?
Thanks.
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: machine screws |
Hi Carlos,
I've been using some mil. spec. Phillips head screws for access
panels to the forward cabin area. I have removed them several times
and the screw heads don't show any damage at all.
Perhaps the steel in those mil. spec. screws are a lot harder than
the hardware store ones that seem to get reamed out with just a little use.
I'm not sure if the screws I'm using are the same ones in your A/S
link, but I think they are the same as the ones in the original XL
drawings for inspection ports.
Paul
XL getting close
At 07:09 PM 11/25/2008, you wrote:
>I am looking for some information: I am using machine screws MS51959
>6-32 thread (
><http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/ms51959.php>http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/ms51959.php
>) to fasten an access panel to its frame.
>The frame has several anchor nuts K-1100-06 ( near the bottom of
><http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/anchornuts.php>http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/anchornuts.php
>).
>
>I find that the Phillips head in general doesn't last long - I much
>prefer the ones with a square (Robertson drive) or hex hole.
>Do such screws exist? (i.e., 82 degrees head, 6-32 thread with a
>square or hex head)
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: machine screws |
Carlos
You might try Torx head screws. McMaster-Carr sells 6-32 pan head (I don't
know what an 82=B0 head is) for 7-15 cents, depending on material (SS or
Zinc-plated steel). I have found Torx head to be more durable than Phillips
head screws.
See p/n
<http://www.mcmaster.com/itm/find.ASP?tab=find&context=psrchDtlLink&fast
track=False&searchstring=96710A261>96710A261
Terry
At 10:09 PM 11/25/2008 -0500, Carlos wrote:
>I am looking for some information: I am using machine screws MS51959 6-32
>thread (
><http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/ms51959.php>http://www.aircr
aftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/ms51959.php
>) to fasten an access panel to its frame.
>The frame has several anchor nuts K-1100-06 ( near the bottom of
><http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/anchornuts.php>http://www.ai
rcraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/anchornuts.php
>).
>
>I find that the Phillips head in general doesn't last long - I much prefer
>the ones with a square (Robertson drive) or hex hole.
>Do such screws exist? (i.e., 82 degrees head, 6-32 thread with a square or
>hex head)
>
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>Carlos
>CH601-HD, plans
Terry Phillips ZBAGer
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail, flaps, & ailerons
are done; working on the wings
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|