Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:34 AM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (aerobat)
2. 04:13 AM - Re: Effects of Grounding 601XL (Bryan Martin)
3. 04:39 AM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Bryan Martin)
4. 05:17 AM - New Note... (Beckman, Rick)
5. 07:14 AM - Re: New Note... (Jeyoung65@aol.com)
6. 07:14 AM - Re: Effects of Grounding 601XL (ashontz)
7. 07:38 AM - Re: Effects of Grounding 601XL (Sabrina)
8. 08:25 AM - Re: Effects of Grounding 601XL (steve)
9. 08:59 AM - Re: Effects of Grounding 601XL (Sabrina)
10. 10:03 AM - Initial Zenith Response (lwinger)
11. 10:34 AM - Re: Initial Zenith Response (John Davis)
12. 11:17 AM - Initial Zenith Response (Beckman, Rick)
13. 11:17 AM - Re: Initial Zenith Response (swater6)
14. 11:26 AM - Grounding (Bill Pagan)
15. 01:04 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Juan Vega)
16. 01:27 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (ashontz)
17. 01:30 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Gig Giacona)
18. 01:32 PM - Re: Grounding (ashontz)
19. 01:35 PM - AOPA Coverage of the Story... (Gig Giacona)
20. 01:41 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (ashontz)
21. 02:03 PM - Re: Initial Zenith Response (ashontz)
22. 02:06 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Jeff Davidson)
23. 02:24 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (ashontz)
24. 02:26 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (hansriet)
25. 02:27 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (ashontz)
26. 02:41 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Skip Perry)
27. 02:41 PM - I need your help... (Sabrina)
28. 03:03 PM - Re: Initial Zenith Response (kmccune)
29. 03:05 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Bryan Martin)
30. 03:11 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Bryan Martin)
31. 03:38 PM - Re: I need your help... (n801bh@netzero.com)
32. 03:51 PM - Re: I need your help... (William Dominguez)
33. 04:20 PM - Re: I need your help... (Sabrina)
34. 04:33 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Gary Gower)
35. 04:35 PM - Re: I need your help... (pavel569)
36. 04:48 PM - First real result of the NTSB report (Jay Maynard)
37. 04:51 PM - Flight training in homebuilt. (601corvair)
38. 04:55 PM - Re: I need your help... (Sabrina)
39. 05:25 PM - Re: Re: I need your help... (n801bh@netzero.com)
40. 06:14 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (T. Graziano)
41. 06:17 PM - Mass balancing of Ailerons - How to (eddies)
42. 06:37 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Juan Vega)
43. 06:55 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Jay Maynard)
44. 07:22 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Sabrina)
45. 07:35 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Jay Maynard)
46. 07:39 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (John Smith)
47. 07:39 PM - Re: First real result of the NTSB report (Paul Mulwitz)
48. 07:46 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Paul Mulwitz)
49. 07:59 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (purplemoon99@bellsouth.net)
50. 08:12 PM - Re: First real result of the NTSB report (Jay Maynard)
51. 08:30 PM - Re: Flight training in homebuilt. (Tim Juhl)
52. 08:41 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (JAPhillipsGA@aol.com)
53. 08:50 PM - Re: First real result of the NTSB report (JAPhillipsGA@aol.com)
54. 09:51 PM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (hansriet)
55. 10:01 PM - Re: First real result of the NTSB report (hansriet)
56. 10:16 PM - Re: Just my $.02 (Jon Bateman)
57. 10:22 PM - Mass balancing of ailerons - How to (MaxNr@aol.com)
58. 10:23 PM - Re: First real result of the NTSB report (Sabrina)
59. 10:42 PM - Re: First real result of the NTSB report (hansriet)
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
This is pretty much in line with what the LAA in the UK have said. One aircraft
is currently being modified with aileron mass balances and a beefing up of the
wing spar carry through so they can then evaluate it.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239278#239278
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: Effects of Grounding 601XL |
Just call your airplane a Smith Special or some such on the paperwork.
After all, you are the manufacturer, you can call your airplane
anything you want. If the FAA decides to ground all 601 XL amateur
built airplanes, they're going to have to ground each one
individually. I doubt very much that they have the manpower or the
desire to put out that kind of effort. They can't ground the whole
type because there is no type certificate. Each homebuilt is
considered a one of a kind airplane.
On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:48 PM, John Smith wrote:
> I have been working on my 601XL like a mad-dog finishing it up and
> am waiting for the FAA to inspect my 601XL mid-May. I suppose the
> FAA won't inspect/issue me an airworthiness certificate no matter
> how well I build my airplane if the FAA ground the 601XL. Just my
> luck? As for Zenith, I hope they can be pro-active and address the
> potential fluttering issues whether real or imaginary so the 601XLs
> can regain the status as a flying machine and not as expensive three-
> wheels go-cart with wings. Ladies and gentlemen, it's only a matter
> of time before the FAA ground all 601XLs so let's have a beer or two
> and hopefully a fix or two come along by the time we get sobber.
>
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
The original plane for the XL, like the HD, had the "hingeless"
ailerons. The original prototype has this design, it has been flown
for hundreds of hours to airshows all over the country for over nine
years now with no trouble. Many builders changed the design to piano
hinge ailerons and the AMD S-LSA has piano hinge ailerons because
"real airplanes have hinges". As far as I know, all of the accident
aircraft had the piano hinge ailerons. It stands to reason that the
dynamic response of the two different aileron designs are going to be
different due to the elastic properties of the "hingeless" design that
is missing on the piano hinge design. I suspect that the elasticity of
the hingeless design makes the resonant frequency fall farther outside
of the flight envelope of the airplane. Mine has the hingeless
ailerons. I have 265 hours on mine and have flown it to the far edges
of the flight envelope and slightly beyond during phase one testing
with no hint of flutter. I'm convinced that my airplane is safe
enough for the type of flying I do.
On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:52 PM, Bob Collins wrote:
>
> I have a question to the 601 cognoscenti, how are the XL ailerons
> designed differently then the HD(S) ones? The NTSB letter was quite
> specific to the 601XL.
>
> Bob Collins
> Sunnyvale CA USA
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Good Morning, All!
In keeping up with all the responses and comments about
flutter, my XL may soon be ready to fly. Eight years into the build
(with many interruptions), I finally got to hear the Jabiru 3300 run
last Saturday. I was impressed! It exceeded my expectations big time.
About a half inch of throttle would scoot the plane on the driveway! I
had the brakes full on. Sounds GREAT! (say it like Tony the Tiger)
Now, with proper cable tension and no flutter....
Happy flying and building to you all!
Rick Beckman
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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 |
|
Per AVWEB the FAA is stilling looking into the problem but not ready to
ground all 601XL. Jerry of GA DO NOT ARCHIVE
FAA RESPONDS TO ZODIAC CONCERNS
The FAA is already looking into concerns about all versions of the Zodiac
aircraft, which
were raised at an industry meeting back in February, FAA spokeswoman Laur
a
J. Brown told
AVweb on Tuesday, but she added that the agency has no immediate plans to
call for the
airplanes to be grounded. "The manufacturer already has told owners to
check the aileron
control cable tensions," she said. The FAA has formed a special review tea
m
with members
from the FAA and the industry to investigate the problem. Brown added tha
t
the FAA has
told the ASTM that it should conduct a review of its LSA standards
regarding aerodynamic
flutter. More...
In a message dated 4/15/2009 7:17:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Rick.Beckman@atk.com writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Beckman, Rick" <Rick.Beckman@atk.com
>
Good Morning, All!
In keeping up with all the responses and comments about
flutter, my XL may soon be ready to fly. Eight years into the build
(with many interruptions), I finally got to hear the Jabiru 3300 run
last Saturday. I was impressed! It exceeded my expectations big time.
About a half inch of throttle would scoot the plane on the driveway! I
had the brakes full on. Sounds GREAT! (say it like Tony the Tiger)
Now, with proper cable tension and no flutter....
Happy flying and building to you all!
Rick Beckman
DO NOT ARCHIVE
**************Great deals on Dell=99s most popular laptops =93
Starting at
$479
=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B213968550%3B35701427%3Bh)
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: Effects of Grounding 601XL |
Yes, should be titled "Effects of grounding LSA CH601XLs". Like Martin Pohl said
in another thread (I think that's his name, the guy from Switzerland) it'll
be the most thoroughly tested homebuilt airplane flying. The fact that some of
them are grounded is due to the fact they some of them are LSA.
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239306#239306
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: Effects of Grounding 601XL |
The NTSB may have focused on 601XL LSAs but the FAA has a task force looking into
"all versions of the Zodiac," not just 601s or LSAs. So, re-naming a Zodiac
derived aircraft would accomplish little--modifying it is a different story,
that is why it is called EXPERIMENTAL. It is a good sign that "the agency has
no immediate plans to call for the airplanes to be grounded..."
That does not mean they have ruled out introducing other limitations such as speed,
airspace, and passengers carrying...
It is interesting that the US CZAW owners received the NTSB notice directly.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239309#239309
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: Effects of Grounding 601XL |
What the factory did with the AvidFlyers was to send out a mandatory
bulletin stating "no further flights until the balance was installed".
FAA never was involved.
SW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Martin" <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 4:12 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Effects of Grounding 601XL
>
> Just call your airplane a Smith Special or some such on the paperwork.
> After all, you are the manufacturer, you can call your airplane anything
> you want. If the FAA decides to ground all 601 XL amateur built
> airplanes, they're going to have to ground each one individually. I doubt
> very much that they have the manpower or the desire to put out that kind
> of effort. They can't ground the whole type because there is no type
> certificate. Each homebuilt is considered a one of a kind airplane.
>
> On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:48 PM, John Smith wrote:
>
>> I have been working on my 601XL like a mad-dog finishing it up and am
>> waiting for the FAA to inspect my 601XL mid-May. I suppose the FAA
>> won't inspect/issue me an airworthiness certificate no matter how well I
>> build my airplane if the FAA ground the 601XL. Just my luck? As for
>> Zenith, I hope they can be pro-active and address the potential
>> fluttering issues whether real or imaginary so the 601XLs can regain the
>> status as a flying machine and not as expensive three- wheels go-cart
>> with wings. Ladies and gentlemen, it's only a matter of time before the
>> FAA ground all 601XLs so let's have a beer or two and hopefully a fix or
>> two come along by the time we get sobber.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Bryan Martin
> N61BM, CH 601 XL,
> RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
> do not archive.
>
>
>
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: Effects of Grounding 601XL |
Just talked to Roger, no mention of such an action by Zenith was made...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239317#239317
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: | Initial Zenith Response |
This just posted on the Zenith site:
NTSB Issues Safety Recommendation to FAA
April 15, 2009:
NTSB Safety Recommendation to FAA: http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2009/A09_30_37.pdf
Zenith Aircraft first became aware of the above NTSB Safety Recommendation Memo
on April 14, 2009, at the same time the NTSB issued its press release to the
public.
We continue to believe wing flutter will not occur if the control cables are adjusted
properly. Nonetheless, we are carefully considering the points raised
in the memo, including whether the Zodiac CH-601XL is susceptible to wing flutter.
Each accident discussed in the NTSB memo occurred under different circumstances.
Some of the accidents are still being investigated and what caused those
accidents has not been determined.
Zenith Aircraft will communicate with the FAA about the issues raised in the NTSB
memo. We will provide more information after we thoroughly consider the issues
raised in the NTSB memo and we have spoken with the FAA about those issues.
ZENITH AIRCRAFT CO.
--------
Larry Winger
Tustin, CA
Plans building 601XL/650 with Corvair
Control surfaces and wings complete
Fuselage ready to rivet
www.mykitlog.com/lwinger
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239325#239325
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: Initial Zenith Response |
As a builder who's now got almost 10 hours on my airframe this response
from Zenith is really frustrating. Despite the # of governmental
agencies who are concerned about flutter, the accident rate and the fact
that planes have been grounded in some European countries for months now
their only response is that they need to consider the issues raised.
What the heck have they been doing the last 3-4 months ?
Then to explain that some of the accidents are still under review and
occurred under different circumstances, etc is ludicrous since it's the
NTSB who's doing the investigations and they are the ones who have these
concerns.
If indeed the Antelope Island accident is a spar failure as well, thats
really a concern to me since thats just too many planes with similar
failures for a fleet this size. I've been willing to avoid jumping to
conclusions up till now but at this point really want to see some
concrete actions by Zenith to either discredit the flutter issue by
comprehensive testing or to come out with a fix. The fact that they are
doing this in the UK but haven't had any plans to do this in the US
market is also annoying.
Sorry to vent...
John Davis
N601JD
Burnsville, NC
lwinger wrote:
>
> This just posted on the Zenith site:
>
> NTSB Issues Safety Recommendation to FAA
>
> April 15, 2009:
>
> NTSB Safety Recommendation to FAA: http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2009/A09_30_37.pdf
>
> Zenith Aircraft first became aware of the above NTSB Safety Recommendation Memo
on April 14, 2009, at the same time the NTSB issued its press release to the
public.
>
> We continue to believe wing flutter will not occur if the control cables are
adjusted properly. Nonetheless, we are carefully considering the points raised
in the memo, including whether the Zodiac CH-601XL is susceptible to wing flutter.
Each accident discussed in the NTSB memo occurred under different circumstances.
Some of the accidents are still being investigated and what caused
those accidents has not been determined.
>
> Zenith Aircraft will communicate with the FAA about the issues raised in the
NTSB memo. We will provide more information after we thoroughly consider the
issues raised in the NTSB memo and we have spoken with the FAA about those issues.
>
> ZENITH AIRCRAFT CO.
>
> --------
> Larry Winger
> Tustin, CA
> Plans building 601XL/650 with Corvair
> Control surfaces and wings complete
> Fuselage ready to rivet
> www.mykitlog.com/lwinger
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239325#239325
>
>
>
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: | Initial Zenith Response |
Vent all you want! I'm pretty much in agreement!
Rick
As a builder who's now got almost 10 hours on my airframe this response
from Zenith is really frustrating. Despite the # of governmental
agencies who are concerned about flutter, the accident rate and the fact
that planes have been grounded in some European countries for months now
their only response is that they need to consider the issues raised.
What the heck have they been doing the last 3-4 months ?
Then to explain that some of the accidents are still under review and
occurred under different circumstances, etc is ludicrous since it's the
NTSB who's doing the investigations and they are the ones who have these
concerns.
If indeed the Antelope Island accident is a spar failure as well, thats
really a concern to me since thats just too many planes with similar
failures for a fleet this size. I've been willing to avoid jumping to
conclusions up till now but at this point really want to see some
concrete actions by Zenith to either discredit the flutter issue by
comprehensive testing or to come out with a fix. The fact that they are
doing this in the UK but haven't had any plans to do this in the US
market is also annoying.
Sorry to vent...
John Davis
N601JD
Burnsville, NC
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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: Initial Zenith Response |
Unfortunately, this is to be expected from Zenith or any other manufacturer in
todays environment. No doubt they are receiving counsel on what they should say
publicly and what they should do to limit liability. This is why the diligence
of individuals along with the NTSB and FAA will drive the change needed. If
not for the efforts of those people, nothing would have happened.
--------
601 XL kit N596SW reserved
Tail, control surfaces and both wings complete. Now working on fuselage
www.scottwaters.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239332#239332
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 |
|
At the end this long tunnel has anybody considered or have some idea on the impact
this could have on insurance rates?
Very frustrating situation since I as I'm sure others have expended all my flying
re$ource$ (Yes, I mean $) on the 601 and it's finish and fly this one or not
fly at all.
Bill Pagan
EAA Tech Counselor #4395
601XL QBK/Corvair/N565BW (RES)
---
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
in reading this faa letter, it seems that someone has been lobbying the safety
board to ground the plane and that this report was done based on someones lobbying
efforts copying the safety on the emails on this site. I would love to know
who is the S%#@thead that was hell bent on pushing this.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: dougsire <dsire@imt.net>
>Sent: Apr 14, 2009 4:18 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
>
>
>While surfing the NTSB site today I found this letter to the FAA.
>
>http://www.ntsb.gov/Recs/letters/2009/A09_30_37.pdf.
>
>Among other recommendations to the FAA...
>Therefore, the National Transportation Safety Board recommends that the Federal
Aviation Administration:
>Prohibit further flight of the Zodiac CH-601XL, both special light sport aircraft
and experimental, until such time that the Federal Aviation Administration
determines that the CH-601XL has adequate protection from flutter. (A-09-30)
(Urgent)
>
>Might want to reconsider that long cross country flight this weekend. Might
have to walk home...
>
>Doug Sire
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239161#239161
>
>
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
There were copied e-mails from Matronics in the recommendation? Honestly, I'm kind
of up in the air personally about seeing this getting a once over from the
FAA. Be nice to know for sure, certainly sounds like aileron flutter. Certainly
never wanted to see any publicity about it though. Any publicity there is though
I'd say probably has more to do with foreign safety boards grounding the
XL. Doubt there was anyone actively lobbying for it here.
Juan Vega Jr wrote:
> in reading this faa letter, it seems that someone has been lobbying the safety
board to ground the plane and that this report was done based on someones lobbying
efforts copying the safety on the emails on this site. I would love to
know who is the S%#@thead that was hell bent on pushing this.
>
> Juan
> --
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239347#239347
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
ashontz wrote:
> Doubt there was anyone actively lobbying for it here.
>
Andy, please don't take this the wrong way. But you are being terribly naive. It
is quite obvious who was lobbying for. It is in the report.
--------
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=239348#239348
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 |
|
I would guess once the mass balances are in place it would have no affect. In fact,
I would think that the actuary would look at the past documented accidents,
and if there was no analysis, then the rates would be higher. No? I mean, if
you were underwriting insurance 2 years ago on this when the issue started to
come to light, with no real explanation, how would you put together a rate.
And, a year from now, after the thing has been investigated and a solution proposed
and verified, then how would you rate it. Personally, I'd imagine it wouldn't
effect the rate. In fact, I'd expect the rate in 2006 to be X, the rate
in 2008 to X + premium, and the rate in 2010 to be again, X.
[quote="pdn8r(at)yahoo.com"]At the end this long tunnel has anybody considered
or have some idea on the impact this could have on insurance rates?
Very frustrating situation since I as I'm sure others have expended all my flying
re$ource$ (Yes, I mean $) on the 601 and it's finish and fly this one or not
fly at all.
Bill Pagan EAA Tech Counselor #4395
601XL QBK/Corvair/N565BW (RES)
---
>
>
>
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239349#239349
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | AOPA Coverage of the Story... |
It is interesting in that it has quotes from Matthew & Sebastien Heintz.
http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2009/090415Zenair.html
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239350#239350
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Sorry, didn't register with me the first time I read the report. I went back and
checked, I guess you're talking about the ZBAG engineer reference on page
First off, I was just a guess on the ZBAG list, had never paid, and had backed
out simply because I didn't want to see any of this crap go down soon as I heard
someone mention lawyer.
Anyway, what's it's any business of the hired engineer to report anything to the
NTSB. Wasn't he supposed to be reporting to ZBAG?
Hopefully the FAA will tell him to go sh$t in his flat hat and pull it down over
his ears. It's pretty obvious what's wrong with the plane, aileron flutter.
Fix it however you want, personally I'm going with counter balance weights.
But, at the same time, I can see the FAA getting involved now because after all,
everyone had to have their sport pilot rated airplanes, we'll here they are
in all their certification glory.
Gig Giacona wrote:
>
> ashontz wrote:
> > Doubt there was anyone actively lobbying for it here.
> >
>
>
> Andy, please don't take this the wrong way. But you are being terribly naive.
It is quite obvious who was lobbying for. It is in the report.
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239355#239355
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Initial Zenith Response |
What Chris is pushing is that he wants it to be known he's not a dumbass and designed
and tested the plane to be flutter free and his implementation to avoid
flutter is correct cable tension. Not how I would design it, but that's perfectly
acceptible being that other planes also rely on proper maintenance to keep
them airworthy, that's why it's call airworthiness, both the design and the
condition determine airworthiness.
This is a matter of, well, there's an even better way to ensure airworthiness and
it appears to be aileron balancing along with proper cable tension.
Rickey B. wrote:
> Vent all you want! I'm pretty much in agreement!
> Rick
>
>
> As a builder who's now got almost 10 hours on my airframe this response
> from Zenith is really frustrating. Despite the # of governmental
> agencies who are concerned about flutter, the accident rate and the fact
>
> that planes have been grounded in some European countries for months now
>
> their only response is that they need to consider the issues raised.
> What the heck have they been doing the last 3-4 months ?
>
> Then to explain that some of the accidents are still under review and
> occurred under different circumstances, etc is ludicrous since it's the
> NTSB who's doing the investigations and they are the ones who have these
>
> concerns.
>
> If indeed the Antelope Island accident is a spar failure as well, thats
> really a concern to me since thats just too many planes with similar
> failures for a fleet this size. I've been willing to avoid jumping to
> conclusions up till now but at this point really want to see some
> concrete actions by Zenith to either discredit the flutter issue by
> comprehensive testing or to come out with a fix. The fact that they are
> doing this in the UK but haven't had any plans to do this in the US
> market is also annoying.
>
> Sorry to vent...
>
> John Davis
> N601JD
> Burnsville, NC
>
>
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239358#239358
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
On the HD, the ailerons are full length and the belcrank is in the gap between
the center wing seciton and the outboard wing sections. Same for the HDS. Both
have three part wings center section and two outborad sections. The HD wing
has a constant chord and is longer than the tapered HDS wings. On the XL/650,
the ailerons are roughly half the length of the wing. The inner half length
is used for the flaps. The HD and HDS do not have flaps. On the XL, the aileron
bellcranks are further out in the wing which means that the control cables
have a longer run.
Jeff Davidson
The original plane for the XL, like the HD, had the "hingeless"
ailerons. The original prototype has this design, it has been flown
for hundreds of hours to airshows all over the country for over nine
years now with no trouble. Many builders changed the design to piano
hinge ailerons and the AMD S-LSA has piano hinge ailerons because
"real airplanes have hinges". As far as I know, all of the accident
aircraft had the piano hinge ailerons. It stands to reason that the
dynamic response of the two different aileron designs are going to be
different due to the elastic properties of the "hingeless" design that
is missing on the piano hinge design. I suspect that the elasticity of
the hingeless design makes the resonant frequency fall farther outside
of the flight envelope of the airplane. Mine has the hingeless
ailerons. I have 265 hours on mine and have flown it to the far edges
of the flight envelope and slightly beyond during phase one testing
with no hint of flutter. I'm convinced that my airplane is safe
enough for the type of flying I do.
On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:52 PM, Bob Collins wrote:
>
> I have a question to the 601 cognoscenti, how are the XL ailerons
> designed differently then the HD(S) ones? The NTSB letter was quite
> specific to the 601XL.
>
> Bob Collins
> Sunnyvale CA USA
>
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Who has the plane that experienced flutter over the power plant? Did that badboy
have hinged or hingless ailerons?
jeffrey_davidson(at)earth wrote:
>
> The original plane for the XL, like the HD, had the "hingeless"
> ailerons. The original prototype has this design, it has been flown
> for hundreds of hours to airshows all over the country for over nine
> years now with no trouble. Many builders changed the design to piano
> hinge ailerons and the AMD S-LSA has piano hinge ailerons because
> "real airplanes have hinges". As far as I know, all of the accident
> aircraft had the piano hinge ailerons. It stands to reason that the
> dynamic response of the two different aileron designs are going to be
> different due to the elastic properties of the "hingeless" design that
> is missing on the piano hinge design. I suspect that the elasticity of
> the hingeless design makes the resonant frequency fall farther outside
> of the flight envelope of the airplane. Mine has the hingeless
> ailerons. I have 265 hours on mine and have flown it to the far edges
> of the flight envelope and slightly beyond during phase one testing
> with no hint of flutter. I'm convinced that my airplane is safe
> enough for the type of flying I do.
>
>
> On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:52 PM, Bob Collins wrote:
>
> >
> > I have a question to the 601 cognoscenti, how are the XL ailerons
> > designed differently then the HD(S) ones? The NTSB letter was quite
> > specific to the 601XL.
> >
> > Bob Collins
> > Sunnyvale CA USA
> >
> >
> >
>
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239360#239360
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
[quote="bryanmmartin"]Many builders changed the design to piano
hinge ailerons
[/quote]
Well that's not entirely correct. The builders didn't change the plans, they merely
opted for this factory option.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239361#239361
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
True, I remember watching the video years ago and they spent all kinds of time
talking about the hingeless aileron, then said that hinged is optional. Personally,
I thought, "Hhhhhmmmm, hinged sounds better."
hansriet wrote:
>
> bryanmmartin wrote:
> > Many builders changed the design to piano
> > hinge ailerons
> >
>
>
> Well that's not entirely correct. The builders didn't change the plans, they
merely opted for this factory option.
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239362#239362
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
I got no choice when I purchased the quick-build kit. It came with piano
hinges!
DO NOT ARCHIVE
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ashontz
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 5:26 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
True, I remember watching the video years ago and they spent all kinds of
time talking about the hingeless aileron, then said that hinged is optional.
Personally, I thought, "Hhhhhmmmm, hinged sounds better."
hansriet wrote:
>
> bryanmmartin wrote:
> > Many builders changed the design to piano
> > hinge ailerons
> >
>
>
> Well that's not entirely correct. The builders didn't change the plans,
they merely opted for this factory option.
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239362#239362
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 need your help... |
Can someone please weigh their unpainted completed ailerons for me?
Please specify if it is with or without trim installed, flex or piano, and if piano,
whether the weight of the hinge or hinge half is included. (If primed,
indicate if fully primed inside or just seam primed...)
Thanks!
(It would be great if I could get more than one person's measurement.)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239363#239363
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: Initial Zenith Response |
Double check you cable tension and go fly.
Do this, and fly with in the design limits and you will be fine and happy.
Kevin
johnd(at)data-tech.com wrote:
> As a builder who's now got almost 10 hours on my airframe this response
> from Zenith is really frustrating. Despite the # of governmental
> agencies who are concerned about flutter, the accident rate and the fact
> that planes have been grounded in some European countries for months now
> their only response is that they need to consider the issues raised.
> What the heck have they been doing the last 3-4 months ?
>
> Then to explain that some of the accidents are still under review and
> occurred under different circumstances, etc is ludicrous since it's the
> NTSB who's doing the investigations and they are the ones who have these
> concerns.
>
> If indeed the Antelope Island accident is a spar failure as well, thats
> really a concern to me since thats just too many planes with similar
> failures for a fleet this size. I've been willing to avoid jumping to
> conclusions up till now but at this point really want to see some
> concrete actions by Zenith to either discredit the flutter issue by
> comprehensive testing or to come out with a fix. The fact that they are
> doing this in the UK but haven't had any plans to do this in the US
> market is also annoying.
>
> Sorry to vent...
>
> John Davis
> N601JD
> Burnsville, NC
>
>
>
>
>
>
> lwinger wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > This just posted on the Zenith site:
> >
> > NTSB Issues Safety Recommendation to FAA
> >
> > April 15, 2009:
> >
> > NTSB Safety Recommendation to FAA: http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2009/A09_30_37.pdf
> >
> > Zenith Aircraft first became aware of the above NTSB Safety Recommendation
Memo on April 14, 2009, at the same time the NTSB issued its press release to
the public.
> >
> > We continue to believe wing flutter will not occur if the control cables are
adjusted properly. Nonetheless, we are carefully considering the points raised
in the memo, including whether the Zodiac CH-601XL is susceptible to wing
flutter. Each accident discussed in the NTSB memo occurred under different circumstances.
Some of the accidents are still being investigated and what caused
those accidents has not been determined.
> >
> > Zenith Aircraft will communicate with the FAA about the issues raised in the
NTSB memo. We will provide more information after we thoroughly consider the
issues raised in the NTSB memo and we have spoken with the FAA about those
issues.
> >
> > ZENITH AIRCRAFT CO.
> >
> > --------
> > Larry Winger
> > Tustin, CA
> > Plans building 601XL/650 with Corvair
> > Control surfaces and wings complete
> > Fuselage ready to rivet
> > www.mykitlog.com/lwinger
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 39325#239325
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--------
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=239369#239369
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Some builders were putting in piano hinges before they were offered as
a factory option. They were eventually offered as an option due to
popular demand.
On Apr 15, 2009, at 5:23 PM, hansriet wrote:
>
> [quote="bryanmmartin"]Many builders changed the design to piano
> hinge ailerons
> [/quote]
>
> Well that's not entirely correct. The builders didn't change the
> plans, they merely opted for this factory option.
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
I doubt that that incident involved flutter. As I recall, the pilot
lowered the nose and increased his airspeed to get out of the
situation. That maneuver would probably have been fatal if flutter had
been involved. It was probably strong turbulence from the thermals
above the plant.
On Apr 15, 2009, at 5:21 PM, ashontz wrote:
>
> Who has the plane that experienced flutter over the power plant? Did
> that badboy have hinged or hingless ailerons?
>
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: I need your help... |
Ok.. I have not looked closely at the construction sequence of a 601 XL
but, I give up.. How is someone going to weigh a flexed hinged aileron
and find a accurate number?????
do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: I need your help...
Can someone please weigh their unpainted completed ailerons for me?
Please specify if it is with or without trim installed, flex or piano, a
nd if piano, whether the weight of the hinge or hinge half is included.
(If primed, indicate if fully primed inside or just seam primed...)
Thanks!
(It would be great if I could get more than one person's measurement.)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239363#239363
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
____________________________________________________________
Click to compare life insurance rates. Great rates, quick and easy.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYVvB51x1b747a1FnZ0Y
QgvmhRGnpEMQmtXc6nvvMx9VU2OP1IiPVe/
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 need your help... |
I just weighted my right aileron (no trim) in a postal scale and it came at 4 lb
with the full hinge attached.
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami Florida
http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom
Sabrina wrote:
> Can someone please weigh their unpainted completed ailerons for me?
>
> Please specify if it is with or without trim installed, flex or piano, and if
piano, whether the weight of the hinge or hinge half is included. (If primed,
indicate if fully primed inside or just seam primed...)
>
> Thanks!
>
> (It would be great if I could get more than one person's measurement.)
--------
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami Florida
http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239390#239390
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: I need your help... |
Thank you William...
I have Zenith custom building 3 left and 3 right .032 aileron ribs for me and Aircraft
Spruce has shipped the 4130 steel for my "aileron fence." As it stands
now, it will be 1" wide .032 4130 flat stock with 3/16 forward facing 4130
rod "Ls" welded to them 3 degrees off and the flat stock riveted to the #2 and
#3 .032 6061-T6 ribs. The rod should exit the lower skin cleanly through a rubber
bushed hole and face forward.
The two Ls are 561mm inches apart and will be tied together as a fence, the fence
may be 3/16 rod, or flat stock 4130 depending upon whether 100% mass balance
or partial mass/dynamic balance is best...
Have not decided if I will go with flex or keep the piano hinged skins.
I may need to go to 1/4 rod, don't know at this point, but I have it on order.
Just thinking out loud so feel free to criticize, it can only help!!!
Ben, I did not mean for you to remove your flex hinge aileron from your airplane,
I meant if one had one laying around, just weigh it. The small portion of
.016 6060T6 in front of the "imaginary hinge center" is negligible.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239396#239396
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Yes, some of the members of the list-discussed (at that time) that what h
e first related in his post was just-a severe turbulence, but the crowd (
of "experts") shouted FLUTTER!!!--- and flutter was-named...- :-)
-
-
Saludos
Gary Gower
Do not archive.
--- On Wed, 4/15/09, Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net> wrote:
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
<bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
I doubt that that incident involved flutter. As I recall, the pilot lowered
the
nose and increased his airspeed to get out of the situation. That maneuver
would
probably have been fatal if flutter had been involved. It was probably stro
ng
turbulence from the thermals above the plant.
On Apr 15, 2009, at 5:21 PM, ashontz wrote:
<ashontz@nbme.org>
>
> Who has the plane that experienced flutter over the power plant? Did that
badboy have hinged or hingless ailerons?
>
>
--Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
=0A=0A=0A
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: I need your help... |
Sabrina,
here are my numbers - left 4lbs 11oz, right 3lbs 14oz. Both are fully primed inside
- Cortec one layer, left aileron with trim tab + servo. Both piano hinged
with both halves of hinge attached.
--------
Pavel
CA
Zodiac XL N581PL (Reserved)
Stratus Subaru EA-81
Tail, flaps, ailerons, wings done, fuselage is on the table ....
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239402#239402
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: | First real result of the NTSB report |
Well, the first real result of the NTSB report has happened: the DPE I was
going to take my CFI-SP checkride with tomorrow postponed it until the issue
is resolved. We talked about it for a while, and I explained what I knew
about the issue; she said she'd think about it some more and let me know.
I've spent six months getting ready for the checkride. Now, I have no idea
when, or if, I'll be able to get it done. There's only one other DPE who
does CFI-SP checkrides in the region, and no FAA inspector does them. I have
no idea where else I could go within reasonable flying distance of KFRM.
I understand and respect her decision. I'm not going to ask anyone to get in
my airplane who's not completely comfortable with the choice.
I've got lots of words to use for the situation. None of them are usable on
this forum.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, AGI 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 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: | Flight training in homebuilt. |
Flight training in homebuilt.
I was reading the May 2009 issue of =9CKit Planes=9D in the
=9CAsk DAR=9D page 61 and he states
that it is against the rules to pay a CFI to give primary training in a hom
ebuilt. The reason
=C2-given is that they cannot be used to =9Ccarry a person or prope
rty for compensation or hire=9D=C2- It was my understanding that wh
at was being purchased was the instruction and
=C2-not the flight so this did not apply.
=C2-They state that a CFI could do this for free and be legal, but cannot
get paid to instruct.
=C2-I had not heard this before.=C2- Has anyone experienced this interp
retation of
the rule?
=C2- Thanks.=C2- For obvious reasons, I can also=C2- be reached of li
st at:
airvair601@yahoo.com=C2- phill hartig
=0A=0A=0A
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 need your help... |
Can someone weigh an aileron piano hinge for me and give me the length if it is
not cut to length?
Thank you Pavel!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239407#239407
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: I need your help... |
As a Zenith builder and flyer I REALLY feel for the 601XL guys and gals
out there. Zenith Aircraft has been nothing but upfront, honest and depe
ndable will all my dealings with them and I hope they have not changed t
hat business model. And Sabrina, you have restored my faith in the upcom
ing generation, unfortunately there are not too many others like you out
there.
Tailwinds, and do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: I need your help...
Thank you William...
I have Zenith custom building 3 left and 3 right .032 aileron ribs for m
e and Aircraft Spruce has shipped the 4130 steel for my "aileron fence."
As it stands now, it will be 1" wide .032 4130 flat stock with 3/16 f
orward facing 4130 rod "Ls" welded to them 3 degrees off and the flat st
ock riveted to the #2 and #3 .032 6061-T6 ribs. The rod should exit the
lower skin cleanly through a rubber bushed hole and face forward.
The two Ls are 561mm inches apart and will be tied together as a fence,
the fence may be 3/16 rod, or flat stock 4130 depending upon whether 100
% mass balance or partial mass/dynamic balance is best...
Have not decided if I will go with flex or keep the piano hinged skins.
I may need to go to 1/4 rod, don't know at this point, but I have it on
order.
Just thinking out loud so feel free to criticize, it can only help!!!
Ben, I did not mean for you to remove your flex hinge aileron from your
airplane, I meant if one had one laying around, just weigh it. The smal
l portion of .016 6060T6 in front of the "imaginary hinge center" is neg
ligible.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239396#239396
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
____________________________________________________________
Click to become an artist and quit your boring job.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYVgDOQj7SIM5b9dfp4o
WmpsUNRtCMFrBjMuvgRGn1rrU2vnVfU0iE/
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Just got back from a post-maintenance test flight after my periodic 50
hr inspection/requirements (oil chg/filter/Jab head torque check/valve
clearance check/prop bolt torque check, visual inspections, etc) and
nose bungee replacement.
Some comments on the NTSB Report:
Flutter may have had some impact on the XLs, but I believe that the
light stick forces are more likely to have caused any wing removals.
Today while pulling a measured 2gs (as shown on my EFIS) the stick was
still light and the g forces in the semi reclining mode with my arm on
my leg did not give the same feeling as sitting up in a Cessna with my
arm extended.
No complaints about stick forces by me - I like the light stick on the
XL.
My cable tensions were under "spec" for the first 440 hrs on my XL.
I sure hope the FAA does not consider grounding any Experimentals. Next
on the plate would them probably be any Experimentals with non-certified
engines and, and then and -- ??????????????
Just REMEMBER to REDUCE SPEED to Va in moderate or above turbulence.
(It was JAPhillipsGA@aol.com who encountered severe turbulence over the
power plant and reported diving away to stop his wings from flapping)
Tony Graziano
XL/Jab3300; N493TG; 482 hrs
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Gower
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in
US
Yes, some of the members of the list discussed (at that time)
that what he first related in his post was just a severe turbulence, but
the crowd (of "experts") shouted FLUTTER!!! and flutter was named...
:-)
Saludos
Gary Gower
Do not archive.
--- On Wed, 4/15/09, Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
wrote:
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of
601XLs in US
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 6:09 PM
<bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
I doubt that that incident involved flutter. As I recall, the pilot
lowered the
nose and increased his airspeed to get out of the situation. That
maneuver would
probably have been fatal if flutter had been involved. It was probably
strong
turbulence from the thermals above the plant.
On Apr 15, 2009, at 5:21 PM, ashontz wrote:
<ashontz@nbme.org>
>
> Who has the plane that experienced flutter over the power plant? Did
that
badboy have hinged or hingless ailerons?
>
>
--Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: | Mass balancing of Ailerons - How to |
Hello to all,
I found this How to article by Tony Bingelis;
http://www.fly-imaa.org/imaa/hfarticles/howto/v6-1-36.html
It sounds like a good starting point and even covers basic requirements for load
testing of the attached counter weight.
I am going to explore this option to see what I can come up with for my 601XL.
I'll post photo's of progress at http://www.mykitlog.com/eddieseve
Cheers,
Eddie Seve
601XL - 150 hours
Jab 3300
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239419#239419
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
All;
it is so obvious i reading the report twice, and when you read the accident reports,
someone has lobbied the ntsb HARD!. in the accident reports, there is no
mention of flutter. Yet, the NTSB report says people were quoted in the report
, when they were in fact not. This is Horse S#$!@T.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: ashontz <ashontz@nbme.org>
>Sent: Apr 15, 2009 4:26 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
>
>
>There were copied e-mails from Matronics in the recommendation? Honestly, I'm
kind of up in the air personally about seeing this getting a once over from the
FAA. Be nice to know for sure, certainly sounds like aileron flutter. Certainly
never wanted to see any publicity about it though. Any publicity there is
though I'd say probably has more to do with foreign safety boards grounding the
XL. Doubt there was anyone actively lobbying for it here.
>
>
>Juan Vega Jr wrote:
>> in reading this faa letter, it seems that someone has been lobbying the safety
board to ground the plane and that this report was done based on someones lobbying
efforts copying the safety on the emails on this site. I would love to
know who is the S%#@thead that was hell bent on pushing this.
>>
>> Juan
>> --
>
>
>--------
>Andy Shontz
>
>do not archive
>
>CH601XL - Corvair
>www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239347#239347
>
>
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 09:36:14PM -0400, Juan Vega wrote:
> it is so obvious i reading the report twice, and when you read the
> accident reports, someone has lobbied the ntsb HARD!. in the accident
> reports, there is no mention of flutter. Yet, the NTSB report says people
> were quoted in the report , when they were in fact not. This is Horse
> S#$!@T.
Juan, I'm furious right now about not being able to finish up my CFI-SP
because of the NTSB's recommendation.
Even so, I recognize that there may be some fire under all that smoke.
You've continually buried your head in the sand over this issue. You've
attributed every accident to pilot or builder error.
Not ONCE have you offered an explanation for the crash of N158MD, which was
built by AMD and flown conservatively. Never. NOT FUCKING ONCE.
I've had it with you. Put up or SHUT THE FUCK UP!
The NTSB doesn't get lobbied. It doesn't get bribed. It doesn't cry wolf.
If they say there's an issue, there's an issue.
Why do you insist on ignoring the problem?
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, AGI 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 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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Jay, please edit your comments...
Juan has more credibility here than you since he built rather than purchased his
airplane. So too, he has given his time to help kids build an airplane.
Juan is just pointing out that the NTSB report sounds like it was written by Terry.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239432#239432
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 07:21:15PM -0700, Sabrina wrote:
> Juan has more credibility here than you since he built rather than
> purchased his airplane. So too, he has given his time to help kids build
> an airplane.
Whether Juan has more credibility than I do, others will have to judge. I do
think highly of his efforts to get kids involved in aviation.
The problem I have is his adamant refusal to consider that there may be a
real problem here even in the face of facts that disprove his pet theory -
facts that have repeatedly been pointed out to him, and which he continues
to shamelessly ignore.
I will neither apologize for, nor edit, those comments.
My tone may have been intemperate, and for that I will apologize. I'm
feeling a lot of unfocused anger right at the moment due to having to put
off something I've been working towards diligently for 6 months because of
the issue. Juan's posting provided me with a target.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, AGI 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 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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
It was not obvious to me anyone is lobbying for NTSB but it is obvious to m
e that someone really favored Zenith here.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A__________________
______________=0AFrom: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>=0ATo: zenith-l
ist@matronics.com; zenith-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wednesday, April 15, 2
009 8:36:14 PM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of
5@earthlink.net>=0A=0AAll;=0Ait is so obvious i reading the report twice, a
nd when you read the accident reports, someone has lobbied the ntsb HARD!.
- in the accident reports, there is no mention of flutter. Yet, the NTSB
report says people were quoted in the report , when they were in fact not.
- This is Horse S#$!@T.=0A=0AJuan=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0A>From
: ashontz <ashontz@nbme.org>=0A>Sent: Apr 15, 2009 4:26 PM=0A>To: zenith-li
st@matronics.com=0A>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of
bme.org>=0A>=0A>There were copied e-mails from Matronics in the recommendat
ion? Honestly, I'm kind of up in the air personally about seeing this getti
ng a once over from the FAA. Be nice to know for sure, certainly sounds lik
e aileron flutter. Certainly never wanted to see any publicity about it tho
ugh. Any publicity there is though I'd say probably has more to do with for
eign safety boards grounding the XL. Doubt there was anyone actively lobbyi
ng for it here.=0A>=0A>=0A>Juan Vega Jr wrote:=0A>> in reading this faa let
ter, it seems that someone has been lobbying the safety board to ground the
plane and that this report was done based on someones lobbying efforts cop
ying the safety on the emails on this site.- I would love to know who is
the S%#@thead that was hell bent on pushing this.- =0A>> =0A>> Juan=0A>>
--=0A>=0A>=0A>--------=0A>Andy Shontz=0A>=0A>do not archive=0A>=0A>CH601XL
- Corvair=0A>www.mykitlog.com/ashontz=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Read this topic on
line here:=0A>=0A>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239347#2393
- - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
======0A=0A=0A
Message 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First real result of the NTSB report |
Hi Jay,
I feel your pain.
I wonder if your thinking is a bit clouded on this whole issue. Do
you need your plane to do the check ride you are prepared
for? Perhaps there is another plane you can use to show your
proficiency. I understand you have been preparing for using your own
plane, but I suspect a rental would work too. It might require you
spend a little time practicing with another plane, and it might
require a trip to a location where an appropriate plane is
available. Both of those costs seem relatively small to me. (But
what do I know?)
Paul
At 04:46 PM 4/15/2009, you wrote:
>Well, the first real result of the NTSB report has happened: the DPE I was
>going to take my CFI-SP checkride with tomorrow postponed it until the issue
>is resolved. We talked about it for a while, and I explained what I knew
>about the issue; she said she'd think about it some more and let me know.
>
>I've spent six months getting ready for the checkride. Now, I have no idea
>when, or if, I'll be able to get it done. There's only one other DPE who
>does CFI-SP checkrides in the region, and no FAA inspector does them. I have
>no idea where else I could go within reasonable flying distance of KFRM.
>
>I understand and respect her decision. I'm not going to ask anyone to get in
>my airplane who's not completely comfortable with the choice.
>
>I've got lots of words to use for the situation. None of them are usable on
>this forum.
>--
>Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, AGI
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Denial is the first stage in the normal grieving process.
Paul
do not archive
At 06:55 PM 4/15/2009, you wrote:
>Why do you insist on ignoring the problem?
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: | Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
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: First real result of the NTSB report |
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 07:39:41PM -0700, Paul Mulwitz wrote:
> I wonder if your thinking is a bit clouded on this whole issue. Do you
> need your plane to do the check ride you are prepared for? Perhaps there
> is another plane you can use to show your proficiency. I understand you
> have been preparing for using your own plane, but I suspect a rental would
> work too. It might require you spend a little time practicing with another
> plane, and it might require a trip to a location where an appropriate plane
> is available. Both of those costs seem relatively small to me. (But what
> do I know?)
I'm planning to start with my local FSDO and see if there's another examiner
I can try. When I set up this checkride, there was only the one (and the
Minneapolis FSDO doesn't even do CFI-SP checkrides); since then, one
inspector mentioned another, but the DPE herself told me that he wasn't a
CFI examiner. I'll get the real story tomorrow.
The big problem I've got is that I live 120 miles from the closest place
that rents LSAs. I'd also have to spend 5 hours in one just to get signed
off (insurance requirements), and also to get my flying in whichever one up
to CFI standards. That's not going to be something I can commute to easily,
so it'll take travel and hotel expenses, on top of the rental costs.
Another big problem is that my schedule is about to get quite full with
travel for work and vacations I've already paid for. It won't free up again
until mid-June at the earliest. I'd have to work transition training and
another checkride around all that. Getting the checkride scheduled is
problematical enough as it is.
Yes, I'm still highly pissed off by the situation, especially since it was
just a matter of a couple of days between the report and the checkride.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, AGI 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 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: Flight training in homebuilt. |
I'm not sure that a DAR would necessarily be an expert on instructional matters.
That said, CFI's don't always agree on rule interpretations which can lead
to some spirited conversations at CFI refresher clinics.
My understanding is that it is legal for a CFI to charge for instruction given
to a pilot in a homebuilt aircraft owned by or loaned to the person receiving
instruction.
If the CFI owns the homebuilt and wishes to charge for it's use as well as his/her
services for TYPE-SPECIFIC instruction the CFI must apply to the FAA for
a letter of authority to do so. You can apply for it but it is not a sure thing
that you will get it.
Tim
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Working on fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239451#239451
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
I'm still here folks. I'm the power plant flutter guy and by the way, the
removed the aileron cables and replaced them with push rods guy. Best
regards, Bill of Georgia
In a message dated 4/15/2009 9:14:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
tonyplane@bellsouth.net writes:
Just got back from a post-maintenance test flight after my periodic 50 hr
inspection/requirements (oil chg/filter/Jab head torque check/valve
clearance check/prop bolt torque check, visual inspections, etc) and nose
bungee
replacement.
Some comments on the NTSB Report:
Flutter may have had some impact on the XLs, but I believe that the light
stick forces are more likely to have caused any wing removals. Today whil
e
pulling a measured 2gs (as shown on my EFIS) the stick was still light an
d
the g forces in the semi reclining mode with my arm on my leg did not giv
e
the same feeling as sitting up in a Cessna with my arm extended.
No complaints about stick forces by me - I like the light stick on the XL
.
My cable tensions were under "spec" for the first 440 hrs on my XL.
I sure hope the FAA does not consider grounding any Experimentals. Next
on the plate would them probably be any Experimentals with non-certified
engines and, and then and -- ??????????????
Just REMEMBER to REDUCE SPEED to Va in moderate or above turbulence.
(It was _JAPhillipsGA@aol.com_ (mailto:JAPhillipsGA@aol.com) who
encountered severe turbulence over the power plant and reported diving
away to
stop his wings from flapping)
Tony Graziano
XL/Jab3300; N493TG; 482 hrs
----- Original Message -----
From: _Gary Gower_ (mailto:ggower_99@yahoo.com)
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
Yes, some of the members of the list discussed (at that time) that what
he
first related in his post was just a severe turbulence, but the crowd (of
"experts") shouted FLUTTER!!! and flutter was named... :-)
Saludos
Gary Gower
Do not archive.
--- On Wed, 4/15/09, Bryan Martin <_bryanmmartin@comcast.net_
(mailto:bryanmmartin@comcast.net) > wrote:
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
<bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
I doubt that that incident involved flutter. As I recall, the pilot lowere
d
the
nose and increased his airspeed to get out of the situation. That maneuver
would
probably have been fatal if flutter had been involved. It was probably
strong
turbulence from the thermals above the plant.
On Apr 15, 2009, at 5:21 PM, ashontz wrote:
<ashontz@nbme.org>
>
> Who has the plane that experienced flutter over the power plant? Did tha
t
badboy have hinged or hingless ailerons?
>
>
--Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List">http://www.matronh
ref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List)
========================
============
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
========================
============
**************Great deals on Dell=99s most popular laptops =93
Starting at
$479
=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B213968550%3B35701427%3Bh)
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: First real result of the NTSB report |
man, you got to learn to live with some disappointment.
In a message dated 4/15/2009 11:13:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jmaynard@conmicro.com writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 07:39:41PM -0700, Paul Mulwitz wrote:
> I wonder if your thinking is a bit clouded on this whole issue. Do you
> need your plane to do the check ride you are prepared for? Perhaps
there
> is another plane you can use to show your proficiency. I understand yo
u
> have been preparing for using your own plane, but I suspect a rental
would
> work too. It might require you spend a little time practicing with
another
> plane, and it might require a trip to a location where an appropriate
plane
> is available. Both of those costs seem relatively small to me. (But
what
> do I know?)
I'm planning to start with my local FSDO and see if there's another
examiner
I can try. When I set up this checkride, there was only the one (and the
Minneapolis FSDO doesn't even do CFI-SP checkrides); since then, one
inspector mentioned another, but the DPE herself told me that he wasn't
a
CFI examiner. I'll get the real story tomorrow.
The big problem I've got is that I live 120 miles from the closest place
that rents LSAs. I'd also have to spend 5 hours in one just to get signed
off (insurance requirements), and also to get my flying in whichever one
up
to CFI standards. That's not going to be something I can commute to easil
y,
so it'll take travel and hotel expenses, on top of the rental costs.
Another big problem is that my schedule is about to get quite full with
travel for work and vacations I've already paid for. It won't free up aga
in
until mid-June at the earliest. I'd have to work transition training and
another checkride around all that. Getting the checkride scheduled is
problematical enough as it is.
Yes, I'm still highly pissed off by the situation, especially since it wa
s
just a matter of a couple of days between the report and the checkride.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, AGI 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
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
**************Great deals on Dell=99s most popular laptops =93
Starting at
$479
=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B213968550%3B35701427%3Bh)
Message 54
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
--I've had it with you. Put up or SHUT THE FUCK UP!
THANK YOU JAY!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239456#239456
Message 55
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First real result of the NTSB report |
Jay,
Can't you just use ANY plane to do the check ride? Doesn't need to be LSA.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239457#239457
Message 56
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Just my $.02 |
Iv'e been quietly reading and building from plans my 601XL going on 4 years
. Just like everyone else that owns and or dreams of flying their XL I bel
ieved that this plane and design was for me. I didn't think for a minute th
at it was going to be perfect in ever aspect. I doubt that man has or will
ever build a flying machine that sooner or later doesn't have a AD attached
to it. The NTSB and everyone that is or will be envolved in the matter wil
l come up with a plan to make our planes even better and safer than they we
re when we said I DO. Whatever the fix is I plan on using it to enhance my
601XL.
If it sounds as if I am plugging for Zenith well thats your $.02
Jon B. still cutting and forming
From: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: First real result of the NTSB report
man=2C you got to learn to live with some disappointment.
In a message dated 4/15/2009 11:13:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time=2C jmaynar
d@conmicro.com writes:
On Wed=2C Apr 15=2C 2009 at 07:39:41PM -0700=2C Paul Mulwitz wrote:
> I wonder if your thinking is a bit clouded on this whole issue. Do you
> need your plane to do the check ride you are prepared for? Perhaps there
> is another plane you can use to show your proficiency. I understand you
> have been preparing for using your own plane=2C but I suspect a rental wo
uld
> work too. It might require you spend a little time practicing with anoth
er
> plane=2C and it might require a trip to a location where an appropriate p
lane
> is available. Both of those costs seem relatively small to me. (But wha
t
> do I know?)
I'm planning to start with my local FSDO and see if there's another examine
r
I can try. When I set up this checkride=2C there was only the one (and the
Minneapolis FSDO doesn't even do CFI-SP checkrides)=3B since then=2C one
inspector mentioned another=2C but the DPE herself told me that he wasn't a
CFI examiner. I'll get the real story tomorrow.
The big problem I've got is that I live 120 miles from the closest place
that rents LSAs. I'd also have to spend 5 hours in one just to get signed
off (insurance requirements)=2C and also to get my flying in whichever one
up
to CFI standards. That's not going to be something I can commute to easily
=2C
so it'll take travel and hotel expenses=2C on top of the rental costs.
Another big problem is that my schedule is about to get quite full with
travel for work and vacations I've already paid for. It won't free up again
until mid-June at the earliest. I'd have to work transition training and
another checkride around all that. Getting the checkride scheduled is
problematical enough as it is.
Yes=2C I'm still highly pissed off by the situation=2C especially since it
was
just a matter of a couple of days between the report and the checkride.
--
Jay Maynard=2C K5ZC=2C PP-ASEL=2C AGI http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont=2C MN (KFRM) (Yes=2C that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC ================
======= the ties Day =============
========== - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ==
=====================
- List Contribution Web Site sp=3B =====
====================
=======
_________________________________________________________________
Rediscover Hotmail=AE: Now available on your iPhone or BlackBerry
http://windowslive.com/RediscoverHotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Rediscover_
Mobile1_042009
Message 57
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Mass balancing of ailerons - How to |
For those that have back copies of the Zenair Association newsletters, look
at early 1987. ZN-40 and ZN-41 have drawings for Mass balances that may
work for the 601XL and 650.
Bob
601XL/Lyc Do not archive
**************
Access 350+ FREE radio stations
anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)
Message 58
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First real result of the NTSB report |
Hans,
Just curious, are you the Emmy nominated/winning Director JOHANNES HERMAN VAN RIET?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239459#239459
Message 59
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First real result of the NTSB report |
Guilty.
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239461#239461
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! --
|