Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:55 AM - CLEANING AND FILLING DENTS (Beckman, Rick)
2. 06:16 AM - Re: a gentle suggestion (Gig Giacona)
3. 06:17 AM - canopy latch (Joe)
4. 08:22 AM - Re: Re: a gentle suggestion (steve)
5. 09:48 AM - Re: Re: a gentle suggestion (Gary Gower)
6. 11:41 AM - Re: a gentle suggestion (Gig Giacona)
7. 12:11 PM - Re: Re: a gentle suggestion (steve)
8. 12:16 PM - Re: Re: a gentle suggestion (steve)
9. 02:38 PM - Re: Re: a gentle suggestion (Bryan Martin)
10. 02:40 PM - Re: a gentle suggestion (Sabrina)
11. 03:02 PM - Re: Re: a gentle suggestion (Bryan Martin)
12. 05:07 PM - Re: a gentle suggestion (Gig Giacona)
13. 05:29 PM - CZAW (Jeff)
14. 05:35 PM - Re: CZAW (Gig Giacona)
15. 05:37 PM - (Bill Pagan)
16. 05:45 PM - Re: a gentle suggestion (Sabrina)
17. 05:51 PM - Re: CLEANING AND FILLING DENTS (Bill Naumuk)
18. 08:39 PM - Re: Re: a gentle suggestion (Roger & Lina Hill)
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: | CLEANING AND FILLING DENTS |
Well.....I can sand mine, so probably something a little
different. If you cannot sand it, I would not use it! Frome way.
Rick
Do not archive.
I think I have some of the stuff you're talking about, and if you
don't get it right the first time it's stuck, and you're stuck because
you can't sand it.
Bill
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: a gentle suggestion |
notsew_evets(at)frontiern wrote:
>
> Best not to have the propeller log in with the engine log. Have a sepersted
> book for each.
> Sharpen your pencil and just go fly.
>
> ---
Why is that?
--------
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=228637#228637
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 |
|
has anyone sucessfully changed the locking mechanisem on the 601 xl
to that of the ch 650. ifn so please give me your phone no i wont to
talk.
Thanks, Joe
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: a gentle suggestion |
If the prop data is in with the engine log and you change out the propeller
(for what ever reason) you must notify the FAA and redo your test period.
Maybe only five hours test but its still a test period.
Then the insurance company.... If you have an incident or accident the log
must match what's on the aircraft.
I know we "cheat" now and then but the insurance company will do their best
not to pay...
If I remember correctly, years ago we were operating under part 8206-D.
That allowed you to just make a logbook entry and then you were covered.
Today there is a different "part" and a modification to your aircraft causes
all kinds of certifications to be scrutinized....
Again, we do cheat on the rules but remember your kind and loving insurance
company is looking for any excuse to reject your claim.........
Then you deal with the FAA. I have, and luck have it, my records were up
to date........(experimented with five different props to get best
performance)
Crazy rules example: if you have a certified engine like the 0-200 and the
data plate is still on the engine, you must be a certified mechanic (P) to
work on the darn thing. If you simply remove the plate its then considered
experimental and your home free. Do your own overhauls etc and go fly.
Same engine without the plate can make life easier for homebuilders....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 7:15 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: a gentle suggestion
>
>
> notsew_evets(at)frontiern wrote:
>>
>> Best not to have the propeller log in with the engine log. Have a
>> sepersted
>> book for each.
>> Sharpen your pencil and just go fly.
>>
>> ---
>
>
> Why is that?
>
> --------
> 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=228637#228637
>
>
>
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: a gentle suggestion |
The insurance companies have only two simple goals for- their workers:-
-
-
Do their best To sell- Insurance policies--as-complete and expensiv
e as possible.
-
Do their best job in looking for excuses to not pay the insurance policies.
- :-)- :-)
-
-
Saludos
Gary Gower.
Do not archive.
-
--- On Thu, 2/5/09, steve <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net> wrote:
From: steve <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: a gentle suggestion
<notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
If the prop data is in with the engine log and you change out the propeller
(for what ever reason) you must notify the FAA and redo your test period.
Maybe only five hours test but its still a test period.
Then the insurance company.... If you have an incident or accident the log
must match what's on the aircraft.
I know we "cheat" now and then but the insurance company will do
their best
not to pay...
If I remember correctly, years ago we were operating under part 8206-D.
That allowed you to just make a logbook entry and then you were covered.
Today there is a different "part" and a modification to your aircraft
causes
all kinds of certifications to be scrutinized....
Again, we do cheat on the rules but remember your kind and loving insurance
company is looking for any excuse to reject your claim.........
Then you deal with the FAA. I have, and luck have it, my records were up
to date........(experimented with five different props to get best
performance)
Crazy rules example: if you have a certified engine like the 0-200 and th
e
data plate is still on the engine, you must be a certified mechanic (P) to
work on the darn thing. If you simply remove the plate its then considered
experimental and your home free. Do your own overhauls etc and go fly.
Same engine without the plate can make life easier for homebuilders....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 7:15 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: a gentle suggestion
<wrgiacona@gmail.com>
>
>
> notsew_evets(at)frontiern wrote:
>>
>> Best not to have the propeller log in with the engine log. Have a
>> sepersted
>> book for each.
>> Sharpen your pencil and just go fly.
>>
>> ---
>
>
> Why is that?
>
> --------
> 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=228637#228637
>
=0A=0A=0A
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: a gentle suggestion |
I'm not about to get into a long discussion of right and wrong BUT...
If you are knowingly keeping two sets of books to get around either an FAA regulation
or an insurance company requirement you can quickly turn what would be
a simple FAR violation into fraud which can have criminal penalties.
--------
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=228708#228708
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: a gentle suggestion |
I agree.
So, if you experiment with your aircraft you will be forever in the phase
one test.
In phase two if you change something,you go back to phase one. You might
get the five hour requirement but if you have a pissy FSDO, youll get the 40
hours.
Say not ? I ve seen it happen.....
Depends on who you get to do the sign offs....
Its best to become "friends" with your local FAA...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 12:40 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: a gentle suggestion
>
> I'm not about to get into a long discussion of right and wrong BUT...
>
> If you are knowingly keeping two sets of books to get around either an FAA
> regulation or an insurance company requirement you can quickly turn what
> would be a simple FAR violation into fraud which can have criminal
> penalties.
>
> --------
> 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=228708#228708
>
>
>
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: a gentle suggestion |
Its income tax time.
Please be sure not to deduct anything your not entitled to take off your
earned income.
.
GoodWill, Church, business expenses, whatever..
OK, back to building/flying.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gig Giacona" <wrgiacona@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 12:40 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: a gentle suggestion
>
> I'm not about to get into a long discussion of right and wrong BUT...
>
> If you are knowingly keeping two sets of books to get around either an FAA
> regulation or an insurance company requirement you can quickly turn what
> would be a simple FAR violation into fraud which can have criminal
> penalties.
>
> --------
> 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=228708#228708
>
>
>
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: re: a gentle suggestion |
This lawsuit was brought against the EAA and the Arlington airshow and
others, not against the builder. As I recall, the verdict in this
lawsuit was later thrown out on appeal. The case also had nothing to
do with the fact that it involved a homebuilt aircraft. The suit
claimed that the airshow sponsors failed to provide adequate emergency
response resources.
On Feb 4, 2009, at 4:45 PM, Afterfxllc@aol.com wrote:
>
> Please try to pay careful attention. Lawsuits are filed in
> experimental airplane crashes. If you didn't find any, its because
> you don't kow where to look. Try looking at this one for starters: http://www.plane-crash-aviation-attorneys.com/html/plane_crash_death.html
> .
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: a gentle suggestion |
Gig,
Don't you and the ZBAG group keep two sets of discussions, one private, one public?
I don't think anyone meant they illegally keep two sets of logs, but rather a 91.417(b)(1)
log and a 91.417(b)(2) log. Most people mix them up, others keep
two sets, keeping the former no longer than required.
What do you think your liability is as to the ZBAG group?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=228746#228746
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: re: a gentle suggestion |
The lawsuit in the John Denver case was not brought against the
builder, he was not even named in the suit. The suit was brought
against Aircraft Spruce, which sold the fuel valve to the original
builder, and the manufacturer of the fuel valve, Gould Electronics.
The suit alleged that the valve was faulty and caused the crash.
The NTSB report states that no no pre-crash failures were found. From
NTSB report LAX98FA008:
"The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable
cause(s) of this accident as follows.
the pilot's diversion of attention from the operation of the airplane
and his inadvertent application of right rudder that resulted in
the loss of airplane control while attempting to manipulate the fuel
selector handle. Also, the Board determined that the pilot's
inadequate preflight planning and preparation, specifically his
failure to refuel the airplane, was causal. The Board determined that
the builder's decision to locate the unmarked fuel selector handle in
a hard-to-access position, unmarked fuel quantity sight gauges,
inadequate transition training by the pilot, and his lack of total
experience in this type of airplane were factors in the accident"
On Feb 4, 2009, at 4:50 PM, steve wrote:
> From the EAA, Only one judgement was ever brought on an
> experimental builder. And that was actually for a faulty fuel
> valve, which caused John Denvers death.
> Homebuilders dont have enough assets to go after.
> Lawyers want deep pockets. I aint got nun..
>
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: a gentle suggestion |
Sabrina wrote:
> Gig,
>
> Don't you and the ZBAG group keep two sets of discussions, one private, one public?
>
>
> What do you think your liability is as to the ZBAG group?
Sabrina, let's hit the brakes here for a second.
1. I have no idea if ZBAG has a second more private discussion set. I subscribed
to the Yahoo ZBAG group for the exact same reason I get into trouble here from
time to time, I like and more importantly feel the need to yell Bu!!$hit from
time to time.
2. I have NEVER donated to the ZBAG fund.
--------
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=228777#228777
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 |
|
>From the EAA eHotline:
CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS (CZAW) IN BANKRUPTCY
CZAWThe Regional Court in Brno, Czech Republic, has declared Czech Aircraft
Works a bankrupt company. It has appointed Pavel Novak as the Trustee in
bankruptcy for the company. The Court has ordered the debtor to dispose of
its assets, and we understand that this sale is currently expected to occur
through a tender process in February 2009. Anyone with questions regarding
CZAW aircraft orders or accounts, or having interest in the company, is
advised to contact Mr. Novak, e-mail: p.novak@czaw.cz. Watch EAA's website
and its publications for updates regarding this situation.
Jeff D
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 |
|
Hardly news... They have been in some strange CZECH version of "financial distress"
for some time now.
--------
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=228781#228781
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 |
|
EAA e-hotline reporting CZAW in bankruptcy.
CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS (CZAW) IN
BANKRUPTCY
The Regional Court in Brno, Czech Republic, has declared Czech
Aircraft Works a bankrupt company. It has appointed Pavel Novak as the Trustee
in bankruptcy for the company. The Court has ordered the debtor to dispose of
its assets, and we understand that this sale is currently expected to occur
through a tender process in February 2009. Anyone with questions regarding CZAW
aircraft orders or accounts, or having interest in the company, is advised to
contact Mr. Novak, e-mail: p.novak@czaw.cz.
Watch EAA's website and its publications for updates regarding this
situation.
Bill Pagan
EAA Tech Counselor #4395
601XL QBK/Corvair/N565BW (RES)
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: a gentle suggestion |
I am so happy to hear that Gig...
You have a good head on your shoulders.
It seems like some people, present company excluded, have started a log rolling
down the hill and forgot to yell "FORE". I just hope it bounces over our heads
here in the U.S.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=228785#228785
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: CLEANING AND FILLING DENTS |
Rick-
You bet, which is why I haven't done anything yet. I'm leaning
towards the ACS stuff.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Beckman, Rick
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 7:53 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: CLEANING AND FILLING DENTS
Well...I can sand mine, so probably something a little
different. If you cannot sand it, I would not use it! Frome way.
Rick
Do not archive.
I think I have some of the stuff you're talking about, and if you
don't get it right the first time it's stuck, and you're stuck because
you can't sand it.
Bill
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: a gentle suggestion |
In the case I Mentioned before about the insurance company denying a claim
because of a "major" change being done after the DAR had oked the plane, I
must say that the unfortunate builder sunk his own boat.
He made the mistake of actually entering the changes, that he made to the
fuel system, into his log book as he made them, thus giving the bean
counters at the insurance company something to use against him, his own
words.
I say "mistake" because as he tried different changes to the fuel system, he
entered the changes into the log book, just as any good law abiding fellow
would do. But, as it turned out, he didn't like the changes, so he
reconfigured his fuels system into it's ORIGINAL configuration just before
his accident. Fine ok, well no.
Even though he had gone back to the original fuel system configuration, as
ok'ed, by the DAR, the insurance company tried to deny his claim saying that
he had made major changes to the fuel system without notifying the FAA and
therefore nullifying this insurance. The fact that he reverses the changes
before the crash did not matter to the insurance company; they still wanted
to deny the claim.
The moral of this story might be.... change many, enter once.
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gig Giacona
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 1:40 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: a gentle suggestion
I'm not about to get into a long discussion of right and wrong BUT...
If you are knowingly keeping two sets of books to get around either an FAA
regulation or an insurance company requirement you can quickly turn what
would be a simple FAR violation into fraud which can have criminal
penalties.
--------
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=228708#228708
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! --
|