Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:09 AM - Re: ZBAGers to the rescue (Sabrina)
2. 12:11 AM - Re: Mass Balance Docs was NTSB grounding ()
3. 02:38 AM - Re: Just my $.02 ()
4. 03:22 AM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Eric Tiethoff (HCCNet))
5. 04:25 AM - Re: Re: Just my $.02 (Paul Mulwitz)
6. 05:56 AM - HD/HDS cable specs (Jeff)
7. 06:26 AM - Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Scotsman)
8. 07:56 AM - Re: ZBAGers to the rescue (Sabrina)
9. 08:06 AM - Re: Attention all Rednecks (Bill Pagan)
10. 08:11 AM - Re: Re: ZBAGers to the rescue (John Smith)
11. 08:17 AM - Re: Re: ZBAGers to the rescue (ihab.awad@gmail.com)
12. 08:24 AM - Re: Re: ZBAGers to the rescue (Dave)
13. 08:26 AM - REMINDER (Carlos Sa)
14. 08:35 AM - Re: Attention all Rednecks (John Smith)
15. 08:37 AM - Re: REMINDER (Jay Maynard)
16. 08:49 AM - Re: REMINDER (Gig Giacona)
17. 08:53 AM - Re: Attention all Rednecks (Tim Juhl)
18. 09:35 AM - Re: Re: Attention all Rednecks (jaybannist@cs.com)
19. 09:47 AM - Re: Re: Attention all Rednecks (steve)
20. 09:52 AM - Re: Re: Attention all Rednecks (Paul Mulwitz)
21. 09:59 AM - Re: Re: Attention all Rednecks (Elden Jacobson)
22. 10:29 AM - Re: Re: Attention all Rednecks (Rick Lindstrom)
23. 12:44 PM - Fw: CorvAircraft> here we go again... (jaybannist@cs.com)
24. 12:47 PM - Re: Re: Attention all Rednecks (Elden Jacobson)
25. 02:08 PM - regarding the mass balance BS (Juan Vega)
26. 02:10 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Juan Vega)
27. 02:34 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Juan Vega)
28. 02:48 PM - Re: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US (Lawrence Webber)
29. 03:01 PM - Re: Attention all Rednecks (Gig Giacona)
30. 04:11 PM - Re: Fw: CorvAircraft> here we go again... (Bryan Martin)
31. 04:17 PM - Re: Fw: CorvAircraft> here we go again... (jaybannist@cs.com)
32. 04:20 PM - Re: HD/HDS cable specs (Roger & Lina Hill)
33. 04:36 PM - Re: Fw: CorvAircraft> here we go again... (Jay Maynard)
34. 04:53 PM - Re: Re: Attention all Rednecks (Rick Lindstrom)
35. 05:07 PM - Re: HD/HDS cable specs (Craig Payne)
36. 05:09 PM - Re: Re: Attention all Rednecks (Jay Maynard)
37. 05:18 PM - Re: HD/HDS cable specs (steve)
38. 06:17 PM - Re: Re: Mass Balance Docs was NTSB grounding (JAPhillipsGA@aol.com)
39. 06:30 PM - Re: Re: Just my $.02 (JAPhillipsGA@aol.com)
40. 07:37 PM - Re: regarding the mass balance BS (William Dominguez)
41. 08:11 PM - Cable tensions for the HDS (LarryMcFarland)
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: ZBAGers to the rescue |
I accept ZBAGs apology. What I dont understand is why ZBAG does not hire this
same engineer of theirs to engineer the fix. Could it be that the true fix is
not structural but a skill/judgment issue? Even with balanced ailerons there
will be guys tearing XL wings off with the stick. Sure ZBAG could re-engineer
the entire airplane to make it fool proof, but it would no longer meet the
LSA weight requirements.
ZBAG--go after the S-LSAs all you want. I commend you for single handedly setting
the wheels in motion that will most likely require extensive flutter testing
for all future S-LSA models. You guys have saved lives, no doubt about it.
But remember that big sign as you enter the cockpit of most of our craft: EXPERIMENTAL!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239854#239854
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: Mass Balance Docs was NTSB grounding |
> From: "jetboy" <sanson.r@xtra.co.nz>
>
>
> take care in choosing mass balance modifications. The design rules applying to
> European 601XL is CAP482 British Civil Airworthiness Requirements section S -
> small light airplanes, section D, design and construction, S 6569
> [snip]
> I found this while reviewing the design rules documents that applied before the
> ASTM became the rule for LSA. I have not been able to freely obtain the ASTM
> spec anywhere but it may become more available now the NTSB have pointed to it.
>
> Both BCAR-S and DS 10141E (formerly TP10141E from transport Canada) design rules
> that applied to the 601XL in non LSA markets
> require flight testing for flutter, and the pre- LSA 601XL design should therefore
> have been tested in this manner, but I dont know the requirements under ASTM
> certification for LSA.
> [snip]
> Ralph
Ralph, thanks for the pointers to CAP482/BCAR-S and DS10141E! A quick
google search and I got both.
Unfortunately, I very much doubt we'll see a publicly-available PDF for the
ASTM specs anytime soon. There are 50 some-odd standards, each in the
~$40 range: http://www.astm.org/SNEWS/ND_2008/stesidebar_nd08.html
In my engineering career I have found the vast majority of these standards
bodies (ASTM/ISO/IEEE,etc.) are primarily set up for $$PROFIT$$ and
providing competitive barriers to entry for anyone but the large
corporations whose employees make up most of the standards committees.
How the design requirements for such a relatively small and publicly
regulated sport/industry like LSA got sucked into one of these things
I just don't know. If you ever do find a copy legally available to the
public, however, please post the link!
Bob Johnson
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: 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
Jon, I hear you.
My strategy so far has been to buy a component kit, screw
something up, scratch build a new part using the plans and my expensive
recently-destroyed part as an example, and move on to the next part.
Lather, rinse, repeat. Time-consuming, slow, and I love it.
My $.02:
The Zenith is a great plane for truly exploring the educational aspect of
this sport to whatever degree desired, exactly as the FAA intended when
it created E-AB. The range of options from plans-builder, to component
kits, to full kits, to quickbuilds, to turnkey LSA; is there any other
plane with so many options on the market? That's part of the attraction
I have to this plane. Even if Zenith the Company went out of business
(I sure hope not) I could still finish the plane from plans. It's a
simple and proven design, as far as I can tell structurally as good if
not better than many E-AB designs that have flown before. But I'm still
the factory. I can modify my plane however I want, whether CH approves
or not. I can do my own FEA/flutter tests/tail mods for my own
edification and enjoyment if I feel like it, whether I know what I'm
doing or not, because it's part of educating myself. After 40 hours of
flight testing I've either proven myself and the plane competent, or
I've killed myself over some unpopulated area. Either way, the FAA
blesses the results and moves on.
I certainly hope the FAA doesn't ground the entire 601XL fleet, because
that violates the original premise of E-AB and creates a terrible precedent
for the entire sport. I don't see any sign the FAA intends to take that
step, thankfully. It's a freedom we have in the U.S. that is sadly not
shared by our friends overseas, and as always we need to be diligent in
defending it.
Like Jon, I expect my plane to have problems before, during and after
I've flight-tested it. Frankly, I expect my building, flying and
maintenance skills will be more of a threat to my plane than any
characteristic of my plane will be to me :-) I've yet to see any hard data
that convinces me one way or another that there is an actual problem with
flutter. Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. Like all of us, I await more
definitive analysis. And again like Jon, I'm sure there'll be more ADs
down the road as well. That's part of flying.
I understand and sympathize with those folks at the quick-build/LSA end
of the range who have significant money and time invested in their
planes, and have valid safety, liability, insurance and resale value
concerns. I also hope you will respect those of us who are less
concerned with liability, insurance and resale value
because we don't have many assets, our (re-)building skills are our hull
insurance, and we're not building with the thought that our plane
has any intrinsic value, except to us. Can't we keep this discussion
cordial on all sides?
Safety concerns us all, of course. But with so many different sorts of
601s out there and so many different regulatory environments, I doubt
there will be a single holy-grail 'fix' for whatever flutter problem may
exist. The U.K. guys have to implement whatever the CAA comes up with.
Zenith will have to do something for the LSA guys if the NTSB gets its way.
These folks are correct in wanting specific answers for their specific
aircraft, and wanting them soon. But us E-AB guys can do whatever we want.
Balance weights, torque tubes, counter-balances, or nothing.
Welcome to Experimental Aviation!
Sorry for this long-winded post. I appreciate all of you who are looking
for answers. And like Jon, if it turns out there is a problem and a fix,
I'll happily incorporate it. And if I can find a constructive way to
help, I will. Thanks!
Bob Johnson
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Dear Jeff, I couldn't agree more !
From: Jeffrey J Paris
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
Hello Listers Under Seige,
Tommorrow I head to my airport to do some work on my Jabiru 3300 powered
Zenith Zodiac CH601XL that I built and have been flying for 250
satisfying and rewarding hours. I need to finish work on some cooling
issues regarding my engine installation and then to be safe I'm going to
recheck my cable tensions throughout the airplane and upon a complete
walk around inspection; I'm going flying to ascertain whether my
"tweaks" to my cooling baffles prove to control my CHT's a bit better.
When I bought my kit I trusted the expertise of Zenith and Chris Heintz,
I still do; remember that this father has sons that fly his creations on
a regular basis and whose livelihoods are derived from his excellent
handy work. I followed the instructions to the "T" and I know that
doesn't guarantee my safety, because I built it , I'm human and we all
do make mistakes. However, I realize that I have always handled any
aircraft that I flew with kid gloves and a fair amount of respect, just
my nature I guess. Moreover, I always listen to and attracted to
learned people with reasoned and sound judgement; Keep training with
good instructors, keep company with good pilots who exercise good
judgement and skills and stay away from those that "hanger fly" their
exploits in a boastful and prideful way. Even though I'm a lowly
private pilot I think I've been able to accumulate close to 900 hours of
accident free flying in 23 years due to the fact that I never try to put
myself in a position where I have to second guess myself. I don't enjoy
self imposed stomach aches if you catch my drift. I believe in staying
proficient and that building, maintaining and flying my own aircraft has
made me a better and safer pilot in th elong run. I know my bird inside
and out!
So until that day comes when the authorities decide to ground me or my
airplane I'm going to do my best to exercise my priviledges as an airman
in a safe and respectful manner. As they say more will be revealed and
I refuse to live in the wreakage of the future! I won't even begin to
challenge any of the prognosticators, arm chair aerodynamacists and nay
sayers in this NTSB matter: Anger, frustration and lack of accurate
information is fueling a climate of fear and mistrust amongst us.
Without a doubt I want an pinpoint and relative answer to these
unfortunate accidents, I have over 1500 hours in 3 years of building at
a personal expense of $58,000.00 in my airplane which doesn't include me
and my Fathers/building partners labor accounted for: Like most people,
I am very keen to know the truth one way or another, but I will wait for
a final decision from the FAA ( if there is one?) and continue to enjoy
one of the greatest privilidges a person can enjoy in this life and in
this country.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jeff Paris N196ZP Kit# 6-4839
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Long Distance Service
Click here to get great long distance service for less!
Click Here For More Information
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: Just my $.02 |
Hi Bob,
I wish the world, and the USA, were the utopia you
described. Indeed, it is E-AB builders like you and me who have
already been grounded by the FAA. So we are the first to be hit by
regulatory edict in the USA rather than the last.
Apparently the FAA has, by private edict, stopped all inspectors and
DARs from issuing airworthiness certificates for new E-AB Zodiac XLs
like mine. As you may know, I already decided to ground mine until
the mass balance that the NTSB screamed for is installed on my
plane. So I just beat the FAA by a day or two in forcing my plane to
stay on the ground for an indefinite period.
As of right now, the only USA XLs that are grounded are ones in the
same status as mine and Dr Ed's - built but not yet inspected.
The only way I will allow my Zodiac to fly is after Zenith or some
equivalent source engineers and releases a design change including
aileron mass balancing. It may take longer than that to satisfy the
FAA so they will grant an airworthiness certificate, but I suspect
the same requirements that will satisfy me as the owner and builder
of an XL will also satisfy them.
Paul
XL grounded
At 02:38 AM 4/18/2009, you wrote:
>I certainly hope the FAA doesn't ground the entire 601XL fleet, because
>that violates the original premise of E-AB and creates a terrible precedent
>for the entire sport. I don't see any sign the FAA intends to take that
>step, thankfully. It's a freedom we have in the U.S. that is sadly not
>shared by our friends overseas, and as always we need to be diligent in
>defending it.
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: | HD/HDS cable specs |
Roger,
Edition 3 dated Jan. 1995 of the CH 601 (HD) Construction Manual gives
the cables tension as "30 to 40 lbs." on page 29. Since the HDS plans were
an addendum to this manual, I presume the same tension applies to the HDS.
As far as I know, the cable runs were exactly the same for the HDS as for
the HD.
Jeff Davidson
Howdy all;
I have my annual inspection on Saturday, and for the life of me I can't find
the 601 HDS cable tension specs. Does anyone know what the elevator and
rudder cables should be tension to on a 601 hds?
Thanks
Roger
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Are there other aircraft where it is commonly recommended that you check cable
tensions before every flight?
--------
Cell +27 83 675 0815
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239887#239887
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: ZBAGers to the rescue |
Ihab,
Recently ZBAG accused me of not taking this issue seriously. That was the e-mail
that was most hurtful. If they are telling the NTSB that, then I have to
defend myself. If anything, I am serious.
ZBAG appears to want the ailerons mass balanced and will not put up with anyone
who offers alternatives such was oscillation dampening. If they had GVT data
and knew my method could not work within a reasonable flight envelope then
OK, tell me I am wrong, but they just don't know enough to make such accusations.
The FAA is between a rock and a hard place. They respect the NTSB but know where
ZBAG is coming from.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239894#239894
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: | Attention all Rednecks |
Well said Frank.=C2- Thank=C2- you for your obviously well thought out
comments.=C2- I agree with all that you say.=C2- The personal attacks t
aking place on this forum are unfortunate and don't resolve any of the frus
tration or fix the problem we are all facing.=C2- I have about $30K inves
ted in my project right now and stretched my budget to get the quickbuild i
n hopes of getting airborne in a shorter period of time.=C2- I sacrificed
flying time in a rental and opted to put the money in the quickbuild.=C2
- Seemed like a good idea at the time and may well still be.=C2-
=C2-
I will keep going forward with my own confidence that the airplane will be
airworthy in a reasonable amount of time full well knowing that the wheels
turn slowly.=C2- I am retiring in in June and was looking forward to havi
ng my airplane flying shortly therearfter but now.....who knows.=C2- I am
greatly disheartened by the persoanl attacks taking place.=C2- We all ga
in nothing from such attacks.
Bill Pagan
EAA Tech Counselor #4395
601XL QBK/Corvair/N565BW (RES)
--- On Sat, 4/18/09, Frank Roskind <frankroskind@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
From: Frank Roskind <frankroskind@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Attention all Rednecks
#yiv1923725730 .hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;padding:0px;}
#yiv1923725730 {
font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
There is more than enough frustration to go around.=C2- This kind of disr
espect, whether in support or opposition to ZBAG, helps no one.=C2- There
are grains of truth in the arguments both for and against what ZBAG did an
d a lot of unsupportable conjecture about near-clandestine contacts between
ZBAG and NTSB.=C2-=C2- What I think has happened is that ZBAG has pres
ented sufficient evidence to say that flutter cannot be excluded as a cause
.=C2- NTSB has a duty to attempt to intervene to prevent a cause of an ac
cinet from bering repeated needlessly.=C2- What this means is that of the
re is a small but meaning ful likelihood that flutter was the cause, tthen
NTSB is likely to recommend interventions to prenvet flutter.=C2-
Further, some very self-reliant people have worked very hard on teir aircra
ft and have a tremendous frustration at the recent events.=C2- I would of
fer that supporting each other through adversity is a more promising direct
ion though.
There are risks in the NTSB recommendation.=C2- One risk is that there we
re no flutter issues that caused crashes, but that addressing flutter distr
acts from some other common cause.=C2- Another risk is that there may not
be a common cause, but that an entire fleet was grounded needlessly.=C2-
My guess is tha NTSB feels comfortable in assuming the second risk, but no
t the first.=C2- On the ohter hand, if flutter is the commmon cause then
NTSB may have saved many lives.
I wish all well in their building and flying activities, and again urge ret
raint, especially in the personal attacks.=C2- I doubt that anyone on thi
s list percieves himself or herself as some kind of spamming villain bent o
n the destruction of the good name os Zenith aricraft.=C2- An inflamatory
and pejorative, perhaps even racist term, like redneeck, seems not related
to building an airplane, nor to flying one. Other pejorative terms referri
ng to dictatorial regimes seem equally misplaced.=C2- I suggest a new rul
e for posters.=C2- If you wouldn't want your parents=C2- or children to
read what you posted, please don't post it.
Frank Roskind
A&P, Attorney at Law,=C2- PPSEL, potential Zenith customer (not dissuaded
by recent events)
do not archive
> Subject: Zenith-List: Attention all Rednecks
> From: dsire@imt.net
> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 20:59:45 -0700
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>
>
> Yep, you know who you are (Moody, Giacona et al.). You're the ones who ar
e convinced that a group of fellow builders has ruined your life just becau
se we have legitimate questions about the viability of the many thousands w
e (like you) have invested.
>
> I have a few questions for you. Why do you think your right to pursue you
r hobby is somehow more important than our pursuit of our own safety? How a
rrogant are you? Do you seriously think that the NTSB would capriciously ma
ke these recommendations without even running the numbers themselves? Are y
ou that naive?
>
> The NTSB letter was signed by Mark Rosenker, acting chair of the NTSB. In
addition to other service to his country, he spent 37 1/2 years in the Air
Force and is a retired Major General. Do you think someone like him is eas
ily duped?
>
> The e-mail I received about the initial release originated from the Chief
Scientist of the Office of Aviation Safety at the NTSB. Imagine that, they
may well have used SCIENCE to reach their conclusions instead of Emotion l
ike you.
>
> Why don=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2t you grow up and direct your anger where
it should be directed, to the hubris of Chris Heintz and his brood. They co
uld easily have released a balanced aileron option, but are too caught up t
rying to protect their asses and pride.
>
> Follow the links in the recent post about the Modesto Bee article and tak
e a look at the photos of the victims. These are real people. The supporter
s of ZBAG are simply trying to make sure no more articles like that are wri
tten.
>
> We know you are all very frustrated by this, so why don=C3=A2=82=AC
=84=A2t you just take your most recently purchased assault rifle out back i
nto the woods and fire off a few clips. You=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2ll feel
better, but certainly will be no smarter.
>
> Doug Sire
> CH650
> Billings, MT
> ZBAGer
>
> --------
> Doug Sire 601XL
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239843#239843
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>====================
> _===
>
>
>
Rediscover Hotmail=C2=AE: Get e-mail storage that grows with you. Check it
out.
=0A=0A=0A
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: ZBAGers to the rescue |
Why would ZBAG need to hire engineers to engineer the fix?=C2- ZBAG does
not get any money for each 601XL sold.=C2- Zenith does, thus, have the re
sponsibility to provide the fix.=C2- So far I don't see any clue that Zen
ith is working on one for the US 601XL fleet, do you?=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A_______
_________________________=0AFrom: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>=0ATo: zen
ith-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 2:08:09 AM=0ASubjec
t: Zenith-List: Re: ZBAGers to the rescue=0A=0A--> Zenith-List message post
ed by: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>=0A=0AI accept ZBAG=C3=A2=82=AC
=84=A2s apology.=C2- What I don=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2t understand is
why ZBAG does not hire this same engineer of theirs to engineer the fix.
=C2- Could it be that the true fix is not structural but a skill/judgment
=C2- issue?=C2- Even with balanced ailerons there will be guys tearing
XL wings off with the stick.=C2- Sure ZBAG could re-engineer the entire a
irplane to make it fool proof, but it would no longer meet the LSA weight r
equirements.=0A=0AZBAG--go after the S-LSAs all you want.=C2- I commend y
ou for single handedly setting the wheels in motion that will most likely r
equire extensive flutter testing for all future S-LSA models.=C2- You guy
s have saved lives, no doubt about it.=0A=0ABut remember that big sign as y
ou enter the cockpit of most of our craft:=C2- EXPERIMENTAL!=0A=0A=0A=0A
=0ARead this topic online here:=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2
===================0A=0A=0A
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: ZBAGers to the rescue |
Hi Sabrina,
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
> Recently ZBAG accused me of not taking this issue seriously. That was the e-mail
> that was most hurtful. If they are telling the NTSB that, then I have to defend
myself.
>If anything, I am serious.
I'm sorry if you were hurt -- I for one have no intentions in that
direction. Also, you as an individual are entitled to your point of
view and are not accountable to the NTSB, so I think you have nothing
to worry about.
> ZBAG appears to want the ailerons mass balanced and will not put up with anyone
who
> offers alternatives such was oscillation dampening. If they had GVT data and
knew my
> method could not work within a reasonable flight envelope then OK, tell me I
am wrong,
> but they just don't know enough to make such accusations.
I don't know the details of the exchange in question. I *do* know that
all the control surfaces of which I'm aware in similar GA aircraft are
statically mass balanced. Regarding "oscillation dampening": do you
mean installing a hydraulic damper, for example? This may be possible
but I have not seen it done in a GA-class aircraft before.
Let me make this point though:
I have a Master's degree in mechanical engineering. (Degrees do not
necessarily confer authority, and there are lots of people without
degrees who exceed me in knowledge and experience. But it's just a
shorthand for some cases.)
That said, => I do not consider myself qualified to design an
anti-flutter solution for an aircraft type <= especially for one which
has suspicion of flutter problems leading to loss of life. This is an
exercise in structures and, to some extent, aerodynamics. I know
enough to know that there are lots of messy factors, often accumulated
into design experience, handbooks and rules of thumb, which a
non-specialist like me should not attempt to dismiss. For one thing, I
would not want to introduce a new natural frequency in the system by
designing an insufficiently stiff assembly, and I would not want to
introduce new vibrations due to turbulence around a bluff body that I
put into the airstream.
Others who wish to embark on this design process are making a similar
bet on their knowledge and experience to which they are fully
entitled. This is just how I would make my bet.
> The FAA is between a rock and a hard place. They respect the NTSB but know
> where ZBAG is coming from.
The FAA's state of mind (if such a thing can be said of such a large
organization) is not something about which I'm prepared to speculate.
We should remember that the FAA and NTSB have lots of important work
to do and, in the grand scheme of things, one homebuilt airplane type
is not their highest priority.
I'm not sure where ZBAG is coming from except to have done an analysis
and presented the data. Beyond that, I am not prepared to speculate
either.
I have been an engineer, and working with engineers, for 21 years. We
are mostly a curious bunch who, despite our egos, mostly enjoy
learning about new things even if they contradict our own way of
thinking. Work is done by committed people presenting theories, doing
analyses, and converging on a concensus. What I have seen so far has
been consistent with my experience as an engineer.
It is an abject failure of the imagination on anyone's part to assume
that this engineering process is necessarily political; to describe it
in political terms; or to mistake it for anything necessarily distinct
from an iterative search for a better solution or explanation. Sure,
there are politics sometimes, but to jump to that conclusion is to
present an appalling lack of curiosity about the underlying questions.
Ihab
--
Ihab A.B. Awad, Palo Alto, CA
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: ZBAGers to the rescue |
Has ZBAG said outright that it KNOWS aileron flutter is the issue and that
is the sole cause of inflight failures? It looks like one of their members
has formed an opinion, which is no more valuable in the long term than the
opposite opinion that everything is rosy as-is.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 11:55 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: ZBAGers to the rescue
>
> Ihab,
>
> Recently ZBAG accused me of not taking this issue seriously. That was
> the e-mail that was most hurtful. If they are telling the NTSB that, then
> I have to defend myself. If anything, I am serious.
>
> ZBAG appears to want the ailerons mass balanced and will not put up with
> anyone who offers alternatives such was oscillation dampening. If they
> had GVT data and knew my method could not work within a reasonable flight
> envelope then OK, tell me I am wrong, but they just don't know enough to
> make such accusations.
>
> The FAA is between a rock and a hard place. They respect the NTSB but
> know where ZBAG is coming from.
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 |
|
Since April 14, about 200 threads, most with multiple messages, have been
created on this list.
While some of them are worth keeping, many are not, and will just bloat the
archives and clutter searches.
Please, when posting , consider the use of the statement "do not archive".
>From the matronics usage guidelines (selected items, not the whole thing):
- THINK carefully before you write. Ask yourself if your post will be
relevant to everyone. If you have to wonder about that, DON'T send it.
- Remember that your post will be included for posterity in an archive
that is growing in size at an extraordinary rate. Try to be concise and
terse in your posts. Avoid overly wordy and lengthy posts and
responses.
- When responding to others' posts, avoid the feeling that you need to
comment on every last point in their posts, unless you can truly
contribute something valuable.
- Feel free to disagree with other viewpoints, BUT keep your tone
polite and respectful. Don't make snide comments, personally attack
other listers, or take the moral high ground on an obviously
controversial issue. This will only cause a pointless debate that
will hurt feelings, waste bandwidth and resolve nothing.
Now back to our regular broadcast.
Cheers
Carlos
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Attention all Rednecks |
I second that!=C2- Let's put our "bruise" egos aside and work on getting
the fix that would give most of us confidence in the airworthness of 601XL.
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Bill Pagan <pdn8r@y
ahoo.com>=0ATo: zenith-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Saturday, April 18, 2009
10:06:19 AM=0ASubject: RE: Zenith-List: Attention all Rednecks=0A=0A=0AWell
said Frank.=C2- Thank=C2- you for your obviously well thought out comm
ents.=C2- I agree with all that you say.=C2- The personal attacks takin
g place on this forum are unfortunate and don't resolve any of the frustrat
ion or fix the problem we are all facing.=C2- I have about $30K invested
in my project right now and stretched my budget to get the quickbuild in ho
pes of getting airborne in a shorter period of time.=C2- I sacrificed fly
ing time in a rental and opted to put the money in the quickbuild.=C2- Se
emed like a good idea at the time and may well still be.=C2- =0A=0AI will
keep going forward with my own confidence that the airplane will be airwor
thy in a reasonable amount of time full well knowing that the wheels turn s
lowly.=C2- I am retiring in in June and was looking forward to having my
airplane flying shortly therearfter but now.....who knows.=C2- I am great
ly disheartened by the persoanl attacks taking place.=C2- We all gain not
hing from such attacks.=0A=0ABill Pagan =0AEAA Tech Counselor #4395=0A601XL
QBK/Corvair/N565BW (RES)=0A=0A=0A--- On Sat, 4/18/09, Frank Roskind <frank
roskind@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:=0A=0A=0AFrom: Frank Roskind <frankroskind@HOTMA
IL.COM>=0ASubject: RE: Zenith-List: Attention all Rednecks=0ATo: zenith-lis
t@matronics.com=0ADate: Saturday, April 18, 2009, 12:47 AM=0A=0A=0AThere is
more than enough frustration to go around.=C2- This kind of disrespect,
whether in support or opposition to ZBAG, helps no one.=C2- There are gra
ins of truth in the arguments both for and against what ZBAG did and a lot
of unsupportable conjecture about near-clandestine contacts between ZBAG an
d NTSB.=C2-=C2- What I think has happened is that ZBAG has presented su
fficient evidence to say that flutter cannot be excluded as a cause.=C2-
NTSB has a duty to attempt to intervene to prevent a cause of an accinet fr
om bering repeated needlessly.=C2- What this means is that of there is a
small but meaning ful likelihood that flutter was the cause, tthen NTSB is
likely to recommend interventions to prenvet flutter.=C2- =0A=0AFurther,
some very self-reliant people have worked very hard on teir aircraft and ha
ve a tremendous frustration at the recent events.=C2- I would offer that
supporting each other through adversity is a more promising direction thoug
h.=0A=0AThere are risks in the NTSB recommendation.=C2- One risk is that
there were no flutter issues that caused crashes, but that addressing flutt
er distracts from some other common cause.=C2- Another risk is that there
may not be a common cause, but that an entire fleet was grounded needlessl
y.=C2- My guess is tha NTSB feels comfortable in assuming the second risk
, but not the first.=C2- On the ohter hand, if flutter is the commmon cau
se then NTSB may have saved many lives.=0A=0AI wish all well in their build
ing and flying activities, and again urge retraint, especially in the perso
nal attacks.=C2- I doubt that anyone on this list percieves himself or he
rself as some kind of spamming villain bent on the destruction of the good
name os Zenith aricraft.=C2- An inflamatory and pejorative, perhaps even
racist term, like redneeck, seems not related to building an airplane, nor
to flying one. Other pejorative terms referring to dictatorial regimes seem
equally misplaced.=C2- I suggest a new rule for posters.=C2- If you wo
uldn't want your parents=C2- or children to read what you posted, please
don't post it.=0A=0AFrank Roskind=0AA&P, Attorney at Law,=C2- PPSEL, pote
ntial Zenith customer (not dissuaded by recent events)=0Ado not archive=0A
=0A> Subject: Zenith-List: Attention all Rednecks=0A> From: dsire@imt.net
=0A> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 20:59:45 -0700=0A> To: zenith-list@matronics.co
> =0A> Yep, you know who you are (Moody, Giacona et al.). You're the ones w
ho are convinced that a group of fellow builders has ruined your life just
because we have legitimate questions about the viability of the many thousa
nds we (like you) have invested.=0A> =0A> I have a few questions for you. W
hy do you think your right to pursue your hobby is somehow more important t
han our pursuit of our own safety? How arrogant are you? Do you seriously t
hink that the NTSB would capriciously make these recommendations without ev
en running the numbers themselves? Are you that naive?=0A> =0A> The NTSB le
tter was signed by Mark Rosenker, acting chair of the NTSB. In addition to
other service to his country, he spent 37 1/2 years in the Air Force and is
a retired Major General. Do you think someone like him is easily duped?=0A
> =0A> The e-mail I received about the initial release originated from the
Chief Scientist of the Office of Aviation Safety at the NTSB. Imagine that,
they may well have used SCIENCE to reach their conclusions instead of Emot
ion like you.=0A> =0A> Why don=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2t you grow up and dir
ect your anger where it should be directed, to the hubris of Chris Heintz a
nd his brood. They could easily have released a balanced aileron option, bu
t are too caught up trying to protect their asses and pride.=0A> =0A> Follo
w the links in the recent post about the Modesto Bee article and take a loo
k at the photos of the victims. These are real people. The supporters of ZB
AG are simply trying to make sure no more articles like that are written.
=0A> =0A> We know you are all very frustrated by this, so why don=C3=A2
=82=AC=84=A2t you just take your most recently purchased assault rifle o
ut back into the woods and fire off a few clips. You=C3=A2=82=AC=84
=A2ll feel better, but certainly will be no smarter.=0A> =0A> Doug Sire=0A>
CH650=0A> Billings, MT=0A> ZBAGer=0A> =0A> --------=0A> Doug Sire 601XL=0A
> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Read this topic online here:=0A> =0A> http://forums.m
atronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239843#239843=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A>
=0A> =0A>======================0A
> _=====0A> =0A> =0A> =0A=0A________________________________=0ARedi
scover Hotmail=C2=AE: Get e-mail storage that grows with you. Check it out.
=0A=0A=0Aarget=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?
Zenith-List=nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com=0Ablank rel=nofollow>h
=========0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 11:26:05AM -0400, Carlos Sa wrote:
> Please, when posting , consider the use of the statement "do not a-rchive".
I disagree. I am keeping every email I receive on any subject having to do
with the safety of the Zodiac. I think it's important that someone new to
the type have the benefit of all of the expertise and experience he can
find, and there have been lots of postings with archiving disabled that
would be valuable to a new owner/builder/pilot. I'm especially disappointed
that Sabrina feels it necessary to remove her postings from the archives,
even going so far as to manually remove them from the Matronics archive, as
she's got lots to say that is quite good and quite valuable.
DNA is overused. It's also only partly effective, as it affects one archive,
but not all (the Matronics forum software ignores it). Sure, DNA purely
personal posts...but if it's got to do with the airplane, it belongs in the
archives.
--
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 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 |
|
Also, keep in mind that the DNA has no effect in the web forum version of the list.
Everything posted no matter a DNA note or not is stored for as long as Matt
keeps the servers running.
It is also much more likely to be accessed via a Google or other search engine
than the listserver history.
--------
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=239911#239911
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: Attention all Rednecks |
Geez, we all need to take a deep breath and step back for a moment. We knew that
this matter would eventually come to head so it is a waste of time to point
fingers and call each other names. Whether you joined ZBAG or did your own thing
is irrelevant. We are all in the same boat, so now more than ever we need
to support each other.
I don't believe there is any XL/650 owner who does not want to see this matter
resolved quickly. Indeed, the problems many of you have reported (delayed inspections,
checkrides, etc.) can only be resolved by bringing this matter to a speedy
conclusion. I'm hopeful that will happen as I see no advantage for Zenith
to drag things out as that can only further tarnish the company's image.
With the above in mind, we should focus our energies on getting Zenith and the
other involved parties to move things along so we can all get back to building
and flying as soon as possible. Attacking Zenith, ZBAG, the NTSB or individual
builders does nothing but focus attention away from the real issue. Whether
you like the current president or not, I agree with him when he says that it
is better to focus on the future rather than dwell on the past.
Tim Juhl
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Working on fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239912#239912
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: Attention all Rednecks |
I believe that the old adage "haste makes waste" is still valid.? Zenith has said
that they are working on the problem.? I, for one, really don't want to agitate
for a quick solution to a problem that might not exist; nor to solve a perceived
problem, only to ignore a real problem.
Suppose Zenith issues an aileron mass balance solution, but aileron flutter isn't
really the problem.? That would leave us with a hidden problem, wouldn't it??
I would much rather? Zenith have the time to find out what the problem really
is (if there is a problem) before developing something to satisfy a perceived
problem.
Jay Bannister
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Juhl <juhl@avci.net>
Sent: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:53 am
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
Geez, we all need to take a deep breath and step back for a moment. We knew
that this matter would eventually come to head so it is a waste of time to point
fingers and call each other names. Whether you joined ZBAG or did your own
thing is irrelevant. We are all in the same boat, so now more than ever we need
to support each other.
I don't believe there is any XL/650 owner who does not want to see this matter
resolved quickly. Indeed, the problems many of you have reported (delayed
inspections, checkrides, etc.) can only be resolved by bringing this matter to
a
speedy conclusion. I'm hopeful that will happen as I see no advantage for Zenith
to drag things out as that can only further tarnish the company's image.
With the above in mind, we should focus our energies on getting Zenith and the
other involved parties to move things along so we can all get back to building
and flying as soon as possible. Attacking Zenith, ZBAG, the NTSB or individual
builders does nothing but focus attention away from the real issue. Whether you
like the current president or not, I agree with him when he says that it is
better to focus on the future rather than dwell on the past.
Tim Juhl
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Working on fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239912#239912
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Attention all Rednecks |
I ll drink to that.
Heck, I ll drink to anything....
----- Original Message -----
From: jaybannist@cs.com
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
I believe that the old adage "haste makes waste" is still valid.
Zenith has said that they are working on the problem. I, for one,
really don't want to agitate for a quick solution to a problem that
might not exist; nor to solve a perceived problem, only to ignore a real
problem.
Suppose Zenith issues an aileron mass balance solution, but aileron
flutter isn't really the problem. That would leave us with a hidden
problem, wouldn't it? I would much rather Zenith have the time to find
out what the problem really is (if there is a problem) before developing
something to satisfy a perceived problem.
Jay Bannister
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Juhl <juhl@avci.net>
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:53 am
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
Geez, we all need to take a deep breath and step back for a moment. We
knew
that this matter would eventually come to head so it is a waste of time
to point
fingers and call each other names. Whether you joined ZBAG or did your
own
thing is irrelevant. We are all in the same boat, so now more than ever
we need
to support each other.
I don't believe there is any XL/650 owner who does not want to see this
matter
resolved quickly. Indeed, the problems many of you have reported
(delayed
inspections, checkrides, etc.) can only be resolved by bringing this
matter to a
speedy conclusion. I'm hopeful that will happen as I see no advantage
for Zenith
to drag things out as that can only further tarnish the company's image.
With the above in mind, we should focus our energies on getting Zenith
and the
other involved parties to move things along so we can all get back to
building
and flying as soon as possible. Attacking Zenith, ZBAG, the NTSB or
individual
builders does nothing but focus attention away from the real issue.
Whether you
like the current president or not, I agree with him when he says that it
is
better to focus on the future rather than dwell on the past.
Tim Juhl
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Working on fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239912#239912
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at
http://www.cs.com
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: Attention all Rednecks |
Hi Jay,
I agree with you that it would be desirable for Zenith to make all
the problems go away rather than just satisfying the
NTSB. Unfortunately, I'm afraid if Zenith had the resources and will
to find and solve this problem they would have done it years ago.
For me, a Zenith design to satisfy the actual demands of the NTSB
would be a great thing to have. This should include mass balance for
the ailerons and possibly some solution for the stick sensitivity
increase with increased G's.
Paul
XL grounded
At 09:33 AM 4/18/2009, you wrote:
>Suppose Zenith issues an aileron mass balance solution, but aileron
>flutter isn't really the problem. That would leave us with a hidden
>problem, wouldn't it? I would much rather Zenith have the time to
>find out what the problem really is (if there is a problem) before
>developing something to satisfy a perceived problem.
>
>Jay Bannister
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: Attention all Rednecks |
I think, Jay, you make a good point. It seems to me that it would be streng
thened considerably, however, if Zenith was more forthcoming as to the what
/where/when/how we assume/hope they are confronting.
-
Elden Jacobson
--- On Sun, 4/19/09, jaybannist@cs.com <jaybannist@cs.com> wrote:
From: jaybannist@cs.com <jaybannist@cs.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
I believe that the old adage "haste makes waste" is still valid.- Zenith
has said that they are working on the problem.- I, for one, really don't
want to agitate for a quick solution to a problem that might not exist; nor
to solve a perceived problem, only to ignore a real problem.
Suppose Zenith issues an aileron mass balance solution, but aileron flutter
isn't really the problem.- That would leave us with a hidden problem, wo
uldn't it?- I would much rather- Zenith have the time to find out what
the problem really is (if there is a problem) before developing something t
o satisfy a perceived problem.
Jay Bannister
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Juhl <juhl@avci.net>
Sent: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:53 am
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
Geez, we all need to take a deep breath and step back for a moment. We kne
w
that this matter would eventually come to head so it is a waste of time to
point
fingers and call each other names. Whether you joined ZBAG or did your own
thing is irrelevant. We are all in the same boat, so now more than ever we
need
to support each other.
I don't believe there is any XL/650 owner who does not want to see this mat
ter
resolved quickly. Indeed, the problems many of you have reported (delayed
inspections, checkrides, etc.) can only be resolved by bringing this matter
to a
speedy conclusion. I'm hopeful that will happen as I see no advantage for Z
enith
to drag things out as that can only further tarnish the company's image.
With the above in mind, we should focus our energies on getting Zenith and
the
other involved parties to move things along so we can all get back to build
ing
and flying as soon as possible. Attacking Zenith, ZBAG, the NTSB or indivi
dual
builders does nothing but focus attention away from the real issue. Whethe
r you
like the current president or not, I agree with him when he says that it is
better to focus on the future rather than dwell on the past.
Tim Juhl
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Working on fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239912#239912
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
=0A=0A=0A
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: Attention all Rednecks |
Spot ON, Jay! Bravo Zulu!
There are TWO incorrect assumptions floating about here. One is that aileron flutter
or vibration alone is the smoking gun in all of the 601 crashes, and the
second is that "Zenith isn't doing anything" about it. Horse pucky.
According to Sebastien, and I don't think he's lying, the 601 airframe is undergoing
a complete structural review AGAIN, by two outside engineers independently,
only to FAR Part 23 standards this time (which includes flutter testing).
All it took was a simple phone call on Wednesday to find this out.
Yes, the elevator pitch sensitivity is a LOT higher than other, certified airplanes.
Frankly, I've spent the last 30 years flying Grummans mostly, which are
also pitch sensitive. So this doesn't bother me in the slightest. However, the
thought of a passenger accidently jamming the stick forward in cruise scares
the bejezus out of me, as it's really tough to reattach the wings as they flutter
away from the fuselage. So I also installed the elevator stops that limit
downward deflection to 15 degrees as a hedge against this.
And, yes. A day at the rifle range, like a day flying, is time well invested.
Rick Lindstrom
Proudly Redneck
-----Original Message-----
>From: jaybannist@cs.com
>Sent: Apr 18, 2009 12:33 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
>
>
> I believe that the old adage "haste makes waste" is still valid.? Zenith has
said that they are working on the problem.? I, for one, really don't want to agitate
for a quick solution to a problem that might not exist; nor to solve a
perceived problem, only to ignore a real problem.
>
>Suppose Zenith issues an aileron mass balance solution, but aileron flutter isn't
really the problem.? That would leave us with a hidden problem, wouldn't it??
I would much rather? Zenith have the time to find out what the problem really
is (if there is a problem) before developing something to satisfy a perceived
problem.
>
>Jay Bannister
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: | Fwd: CorvAircraft> here we go again... |
I thought the Zodiac folks might be interested in this string from the Corvair
forum. You might want to read the referenced article, in which this lawyer literally
trashes the Zodiac design.? I would consider it libelous.
-----Original Message-----
From: jaybannist@cs.com
Sent: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 2:32 pm
Subject: Re: CorvAircraft> here we go again...
As noted in the referenced article, the lawyer, Ladd Sanger, is planning a lawsuit
against AMD over the airplane crash I was in.? I am surprised at his comments
regarding the inspection of the aircraft wreckage.? I was there.? He didn't
inspect the wreckage at all. In fact, we were almost done when he arrived.
He had hired an independent to do the inspection.? The independent inspector's
job is to make it look as bad as possible for the purposes of the lawsuit. Needless
to say, this slightly influences his comments about the 601XL; which should
be discounted accordingly.? In my mind, this constitutes trial by publicity.
My own 601Xl has a Corvair engine.? If that makes it a "Corvair of the air", I
consider that something to be proud of.
Jay Bannister
-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Sanders <tedsanders1@gmail.com>
Sent: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 1:22 pm
Subject: Re: CorvAircraft> here we go again...
it is interesting that the term 'corvair of the air' is comparing the 601 to
the often misremembered corvair car as a saftey plauged auto and has
nothing to do with the fact that many 601s have corvair engines. this is
just a coincidence.
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=32ab9aae-f9ec-49b8-8663-41b15730d99d
don't take any of this brew-ha-ha as any thing against the Corvair engine.
The problems of the Zenair Zodiac CH601 have nothing to do with the corvair
engine.
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Martie Williams <anav8r@epix.net> wrote:
> Lawyer Praises NTSB's Action Against 'The Corvair Of The Air'
>
>
> sigh...
> _________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
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: Attention all Rednecks |
Thank you, Rick. My only question: instead of each one of us calling Zenith
, wouldn't it have been easier for them to have publicly said: "this is wha
t we are doing in response to the real concerns being expressed by the NTSB
and xl owners/builders"? If they are leading at this point, I'd sure like
them to so state.
-
Elden Jacobson
-
Do not archive
--- On Sun, 4/19/09, Rick Lindstrom <tigerrick@mindspring.com> wrote:
From: Rick Lindstrom <tigerrick@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
>
Spot ON, Jay! Bravo Zulu!
There are TWO incorrect assumptions floating about here. One is that ailero
n flutter or vibration alone is the smoking gun in all of the 601 crashes,
and the second is that "Zenith isn't doing anything" about it. Horse pucky.
According to Sebastien, and I don't think he's lying, the 601 airframe is u
ndergoing a complete structural review AGAIN, by two outside engineers inde
pendently, only to FAR Part 23 standards this time (which includes flutter
testing). All it took was a simple phone call on Wednesday to find this out
.
Yes, the elevator pitch sensitivity is a LOT higher than other, certified a
irplanes. Frankly, I've spent the last 30 years flying Grummans mostly, whi
ch are also pitch sensitive. So this doesn't bother me in the slightest. Ho
wever, the thought of a passenger accidently jamming the stick forward in c
ruise scares the bejezus out of me, as it's really tough to reattach the wi
ngs as they flutter away from the fuselage. So I also installed the elevato
r stops that limit downward deflection to 15 degrees as a hedge against thi
s.
And, yes. A day at the rifle range, like a day flying, is time well investe
d.
Rick Lindstrom
Proudly Redneck
-----Original Message-----
>From: jaybannist@cs.com
>Sent: Apr 18, 2009 12:33 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
>
>
> I believe that the old adage "haste makes waste" is still valid.? Zenith
has said that they are working on the problem.? I, for one, really don't wa
nt to agitate for a quick solution to a problem that might not exist; nor t
o solve a perceived problem, only to ignore a real problem.
>
>Suppose Zenith issues an aileron mass balance solution, but aileron flutte
r isn't really the problem.? That would leave us with a hidden problem, wou
ldn't it?? I would much rather? Zenith have the time to find out what the p
roblem really is (if there is a problem) before developing something to sat
isfy a perceived problem.
>
>Jay Bannister
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
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: | regarding the mass balance BS |
to the guys that want mass balance as the be all solution. Remember the Brazilian
601 that crashed half a year ago? it had Massed Balanced wings.
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 |
all planes with cables are regularly tensioned. ASk you local A&P.
-----Original Message-----
>From: Scotsman <james.roberts@computershare.co.za>
>Sent: Apr 18, 2009 9:25 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
>
>
>Are there other aircraft where it is commonly recommended that you check cable
tensions before every flight?
>
>--------
>Cell +27 83 675 0815
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239887#239887
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Hans
kiss my A__
Do Not archive
-----Original Message-----
>From: hansriet <hansinla@mac.com>
>Sent: Apr 16, 2009 6:25 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
>
>
>Juan,
>
>You stopped making sense a little while ago, but you're truly rambling now.
>I would think that the value of a homebuilt would decrease most if the type keeps
falling out of the sky, no matter what the reason is. A thorough review and,
if necessary, modifications to the designcan only restore trust.
>
>And please leave your political views off this list.
>
>Hans van Riet
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=239630#239630
>
>
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: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US |
Hi Jeff great to see how far along you are. . looks great.
keep us posted
Larry Webber 601xl / corvair chugger
From: jeffrey-j-paris@excite.com
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: NTSB recommends grounding of 601XLs in US
Hello Listers Under Seige=2C
Tommorrow I head to my airport to do some work on my Jabiru 3300 powered Ze
nith Zodiac CH601XL that I built and have been flying for 250 satisfying an
d rewarding hours. I need to finish work on some cooling issues regarding
my engine installation and then to be safe I'm going to recheck my cable te
nsions throughout the airplane and upon a complete walk around inspection
=3B I'm going flying to ascertain whether my "tweaks" to my cooling baffles
prove to control my CHT's a bit better.
When I bought my kit I trusted the expertise of Zenith and Chris Heintz=2C
I still do=3B remember that this father has sons that fly his creations on
a regular basis and whose livelihoods are derived from his excellent handy
work. I followed the instructions to the "T" and I know that doesn't guara
ntee my safety=2C because I built it =2C I'm human and we all do make mista
kes. However=2C I realize that I have always handled any aircraft that I f
lew with kid gloves and a fair amount of respect=2C just my nature I guess.
Moreover=2C I always listen to and attracted to learned people with reaso
ned and sound judgement=3B Keep training with good instructors=2C keep co
mpany with good pilots who exercise good judgement and skills and stay away
from those that "hanger fly" their exploits in a boastful and prideful way
. Even though I'm a lowly private pilot I think I've been able to accumula
te close to 900 hours of accident free flying in 23 years due to the fact t
hat I never try to put myself in a position where I have to second guess my
self. I don't enjoy self imposed stomach aches if you catch my drift. I b
elieve in staying proficient and that building=2C maintaining and flying my
own aircraft has made me a better and safer pilot in th elong run. I know
my bird inside and out!
So until that day comes when the authorities decide to ground me or my airp
lane I'm going to do my best to exercise my priviledges as an airman in a s
afe and respectful manner. As they say more will be revealed and I refuse
to live in the wreakage of the future! I won't even begin to challenge any
of the prognosticators=2C arm chair aerodynamacists and nay sayers in this
NTSB matter: Anger=2C frustration and lack of accurate information is fuel
ing a climate of fear and mistrust amongst us. Without a doubt I want an pi
npoint and relative answer to these unfortunate accidents=2C I have over 15
00 hours in 3 years of building at a personal expense of $58=2C000.00 in my
airplane which doesn't include me and my Fathers/building partners labor a
ccounted for: Like most people=2C I am very keen to know the truth one way
or another=2C but I will wait for a final decision from the FAA ( if there
is one?) and continue to enjoy one of the greatest privilidges a person can
enjoy in this life and in this country.
Respectfully Submitted=2C
Jeff Paris N196ZP Kit# 6-4839
Long Distance Service
Click here to get great long distance service for less!
Click Here For More Information
_________________________________________________________________
Rediscover Hotmail=AE: Get quick friend updates right in your inbox.
http://windowslive.com/RediscoverHotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Rediscover_
Updates2_042009
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: Attention all Rednecks |
Zenith made the following statement the day after the NTSB letter was released.
"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."
That was on the 15th. Today is Saturday the 18th. These things take time. I know
I don't want Zenith or the FAA do rush to any half ass or knee jerk decisions
like the NTSB did.
--------
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=239958#239958
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: Fwd: CorvAircraft> here we go again... |
The original Corvair's "safety problems" were mostly the invention of
that self-serving A-hole, Ralph Nader, who was just trying to make a
name for himself at someone else's expense. As I recall, any problems
the Corvair had were remedied in the second model year, but by then,
the damage to it's reputation was already done and Nader was off
looking for other targets.
Anyway, as I recall, the plane you crashed in was a homebuilt. How the
hell can he sue AMD for that crash? AMD has absolutely nothing to do
with homebuilt airplanes.
On Apr 18, 2009, at 3:42 PM, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
> I thought the Zodiac folks might be interested in this string from
> the Corvair forum. You might want to read the referenced article, in
> which this lawyer literally trashes the Zodiac design. I would
> consider it libelous.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jaybannist@cs.com
> To: corvaircraft@mylist.net
> Sent: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 2:32 pm
> Subject: Re: CorvAircraft> here we go again...
>
> As noted in the referenced article, the lawyer, Ladd Sanger, is
> planning a lawsuit against AMD over the airplane crash I was in. I
> am surprised at his comments regarding the inspection of the
> aircraft wreckage. I was there. He didn't inspect the wreckage at
> all. In fact, we were almost done when he arrived. He had hired an
> independent to do the inspection. The independent inspector's job
> is to make it look as bad as possible for the purposes of the
> lawsuit. Needless to say, this slightly influences his comments
> about the 601XL; which should be discounted accordingly. In my
> mind, this constitutes trial by publicity.
>
> My own 601Xl has a Corvair engine. If that makes it a "Corvair of
> the air", I consider that something to be proud of.
>
> Jay Bannister
>
>
--
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: Fwd: CorvAircraft> here we go again... |
No, the plane I crashed in was an AMD 601XL.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Sent: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 6:10 pm
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Fwd: CorvAircraft> here we go again...
?
The original Corvair's "safety problems" were mostly the invention of that self-serving
A-hole, Ralph Nader, who was just trying to make a name for himself at
someone else's expense. As I recall, any problems the Corvair had were remedied
in the second model year, but by then, the damage to it's reputation was already
done and Nader was off looking for other targets.?
?
Anyway, as I recall, the plane you crashed in was a homebuilt. How the hell can
he sue AMD for that crash? AMD has absolutely nothing to do with homebuilt airplanes.?
?
On Apr 18, 2009, at 3:42 PM, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:?
?
> I thought the Zodiac folks might be interested in this string from > the Corvair
forum. You might want to read the referenced article, in > which this lawyer
literally trashes the Zodiac design. I would > consider it libelous.?
>?
>?
> -----Original Message-----?
> From: jaybannist@cs.com?
> To: corvaircraft@mylist.net?
> Sent: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 2:32 pm?
> Subject: Re: CorvAircraft> here we go again...?
>?
> As noted in the referenced article, the lawyer, Ladd Sanger, is > planning a
lawsuit against AMD over the airplane crash I was in. I > am surprised at his
comments regarding the inspection of the > aircraft wreckage. I was there.
He didn't inspect the wreckage at > all. In fact, we were almost done when he
arrived. He had hired an > independent to do the inspection. The independent
inspector's job > is to make it look as bad as possible for the purposes of the
> lawsuit. Needless to say, this slightly influences his comments > about the
601XL; which should be discounted accordingly. In my > mind, this constitutes
trial by publicity.?
>?
> My own 601Xl has a Corvair engine. If that makes it a "Corvair of > the air",
I consider that something to be proud of.?
>?
> Jay Bannister?
>?
>?
?
--Bryan Martin?
N61BM, CH 601 XL,?
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.?
do not archive.?
?
?
?
?
?
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
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: | HD/HDS cable specs |
Jeff;
Thanks for the info. I set mine to 35 lbs today during the annual (the
elevator was at 17 lbs when I first check it).
I even bought a cable tester off my A&P for $130.
I figure I will check the cables every 3 months, just to be safe. Anyway,
it's easy to do.
Thanks again
Roger
_____
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 7:56 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: HD/HDS cable specs
Roger,
Edition 3 dated Jan. 1995 of the CH 601 (HD) Construction Manual gives
the cables tension as "30 to 40 lbs." on page 29. Since the HDS plans were
an addendum to this manual, I presume the same tension applies to the HDS.
As far as I know, the cable runs were exactly the same for the HDS as for
the HD.
Jeff Davidson
Howdy all;
I have my annual inspection on Saturday, and for the life of me I can't find
the 601 HDS cable tension specs. Does anyone know what the elevator and
rudder cables should be tension to on a 601 hds?
Thanks
Roger
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: Fwd: CorvAircraft> here we go again... |
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 03:42:39PM -0400, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
> I thought the Zodiac folks might be interested in this string from the
> Corvair forum. You might want to read the referenced article, in which
> this lawyer literally trashes the Zodiac design. I would consider it
> libelous.
I didn't know that the CFI had died. (Was that Dennis Levy?) I'm truly sorry
to hear that.
Unfortunately, this one seems to be anothe entry into the lawsuit lottery.
--
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 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: Attention all Rednecks |
Sure it would, Elden. Only we're not in a position to make judgements about when
the company should or shouldn't release information on a mass basis. But as
a 601 builder/pilot, I'd like to hear as much as I can as soon as possible.
I agree that the info from the mothership has been sparse at best, and in its absence,
imaginations tend to run wild. But what we have seen has been logical
and well thought out when released. All along they've said "no news is goods news"
while search for the fatal smoking gun, and I believe it.
Sun n Fun is nigh, and I'll bet my Blue Mountain EFIS that Zenith will have plenty
to say on the issue during the event. I'm sure looking forward to spending
some face time with them.
rick
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
>From: Elden Jacobson <eldenej@yahoo.com>
>Sent: Apr 18, 2009 12:46 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
>
>Thank you, Rick. My only question: instead of each one of us calling Zenith, wouldn't
it have been easier for them to have publicly said: "this is what we are
doing in response to the real concerns being expressed by the NTSB and xl owners/builders"?
If they are leading at this point, I'd sure like them to so state.
>
>Elden Jacobson
>
>Do not archive
>
>--- On Sun, 4/19/09, Rick Lindstrom <tigerrick@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>From: Rick Lindstrom <tigerrick@mindspring.com>
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Date: Sunday, April 19, 2009, 1:28 AM
>
>
>
>Spot ON, Jay! Bravo Zulu!
>
>There are TWO incorrect assumptions floating about here. One is that aileron flutter
or vibration alone is the smoking gun in all of the 601 crashes, and the
second is that "Zenith isn't doing anything" about it. Horse pucky.
>
>According to Sebastien, and I don't think he's lying, the 601 airframe is undergoing
a complete structural review AGAIN, by two outside engineers independently,
only to FAR Part 23 standards this time (which includes flutter testing).
All it took was a simple phone call on Wednesday to find this out.
>
>Yes, the elevator pitch sensitivity is a LOT higher than other, certified airplanes.
Frankly, I've spent the last 30 years flying Grummans mostly, which are
also pitch sensitive. So this doesn't bother me in the slightest. However, the
thought of a passenger accidently jamming the stick forward in cruise scares
the bejezus out of me, as it's really tough to reattach the wings as they flutter
away from the fuselage. So I also installed the elevator stops that limit
downward deflection to 15 degrees as a hedge against this.
>
>And, yes. A day at the rifle range, like a day flying, is time well invested.
>
>Rick Lindstrom
>Proudly Redneck
>
>-----Original Message-----
>>From: jaybannist@cs.com
>>Sent: Apr 18, 2009 12:33 PM
>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Attention all Rednecks
>>
>>
>> I believe that the old adage "haste makes waste" is still valid.? Zenith has
said that they are working on the problem.? I, for one, really don't want to
agitate for a quick solution to a problem that might not exist; nor to solve a
perceived problem, only to ignore a real problem.
>>
>>Suppose Zenith issues an aileron mass balance solution, but aileron flutter isn't
really the problem.? That would leave us with a hidden problem, wouldn't
it?? I would much rather? Zenith have the time to find out what the problem really
is (if there is a problem) before developing something to satisfy a perceived
problem.
>>
>>Jay Bannister
>
>le, List Admin.
>
>
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: | HD/HDS cable specs |
BTW: Aircraft Tool Supply is having a sale. The Burroughs P/N 3375D 15-75 lb
cable tension gauge for 1/8" cable that Aircraft Spruce sells for $182.95 is
on sale for $169.95. Free ground shipping on orders over $150 delivered in
the US. The "D" in the part number is important - 3375G goes from 50 to 350
lb and works with larger 5/32" and 3/16" cables while the 3375H measures
50-350 lb and works with 1/4" cables. Go to www.aircraft-tool.com and search
on "3375D".
-- Craig
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger & Lina
Hill
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 5:20 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: HD/HDS cable specs
Jeff;
Thanks for the info. I set mine to 35 lbs today during the annual (the
elevator was at 17 lbs when I first check it).
I even bought a cable tester off my A&P for $130.
I figure I will check the cables every 3 months, just to be safe. Anyway,
it's easy to do.
Thanks again
Roger
_____
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 7:56 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: HD/HDS cable specs
Roger,
Edition 3 dated Jan. 1995 of the CH 601 (HD) Construction Manual gives
the cables tension as "30 to 40 lbs." on page 29. Since the HDS plans were
an addendum to this manual, I presume the same tension applies to the HDS.
As far as I know, the cable runs were exactly the same for the HDS as for
the HD.
Jeff Davidson
Howdy all;
I have my annual inspection on Saturday, and for the life of me I can't find
the 601 HDS cable tension specs. Does anyone know what the elevator and
rudder cables should be tension to on a 601 hds?
Thanks
Roger
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Attention all Rednecks |
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 04:53:25PM -0700, Rick Lindstrom wrote:
> Sun n Fun is nigh, and I'll bet my Blue Mountain EFIS that Zenith will
> have plenty to say on the issue during the event. I'm sure looking forward
> to spending some face time with them.
I'd dearly love to be at the 601 forum with Mathieu and Sebastien Heintz...I
think it'll be a VERY interesting time. Someone wanna tape and put on
YouTube?
It's Tuesday, from 12 to 1 PM in Tent 11.
--
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: | Re: HD/HDS cable specs |
Bestest purchase I ve made .....
22
40
30
Zackly!
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Payne
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 5:02 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: HD/HDS cable specs
BTW: Aircraft Tool Supply is having a sale. The Burroughs P/N 3375D
15-75 lb cable tension gauge for 1/8" cable that Aircraft Spruce sells
for $182.95 is on sale for $169.95. Free ground shipping on orders over
$150 delivered in the US. The "D" in the part number is important -
3375G goes from 50 to 350 lb and works with larger 5/32" and 3/16"
cables while the 3375H measures 50-350 lb and works with 1/4" cables. Go
to www.aircraft-tool.com and search on "3375D".
-- Craig
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger &
Lina Hill
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 5:20 PM
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: HD/HDS cable specs
Jeff;
Thanks for the info. I set mine to 35 lbs today during the annual (the
elevator was at 17 lbs when I first check it).
I even bought a cable tester off my A&P for $130.
I figure I will check the cables every 3 months, just to be safe.
Anyway, it's easy to do.
Thanks again
Roger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 7:56 AM
To: zenith-list@matronics.com; zenith601-list@matronics.com
Subject: Zenith-List: HD/HDS cable specs
Roger,
Edition 3 dated Jan. 1995 of the CH 601 (HD) Construction Manual
gives the cables tension as "30 to 40 lbs." on page 29. Since the HDS
plans were an addendum to this manual, I presume the same tension
applies to the HDS. As far as I know, the cable runs were exactly the
same for the HDS as for the HD.
Jeff Davidson
Howdy all;
I have my annual inspection on Saturday, and for the life of me I
can't find
the 601 HDS cable tension specs. Does anyone know what the elevator
and
rudder cables should be tension to on a 601 hds?
Thanks
Roger
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: Mass Balance Docs was NTSB grounding |
I think some folks here have earned a rather a smart punch in the nose.
Remember, that battery is only a misdemeanor. Have a grand and glorious day
and you folks that earned it, enjoy.
eIn a message dated 4/18/2009 3:11:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
KE6FIS@arrl.net writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <KE6FIS@arrl.net>
> From: "jetboy" <sanson.r@xtra.co.nz>
>
>
> take care in choosing mass balance modifications. The design rules
applying to
> European 601XL is CAP482 British Civil Airworthiness Requirements
section S -
> small light airplanes, section D, design and construction, S 6569
> [snip]
> I found this while reviewing the design rules documents that applied
before the
> ASTM became the rule for LSA. I have not been able to freely obtain the
ASTM
> spec anywhere but it may become more available now the NTSB have pointed
to it.
>
> Both BCAR-S and DS 10141E (formerly TP10141E from transport Canada)
design rules
> that applied to the 601XL in non LSA markets
> require flight testing for flutter, and the pre- LSA 601XL design should
therefore
> have been tested in this manner, but I dont know the requirements under
ASTM
> certification for LSA.
> [snip]
> Ralph
Ralph, thanks for the pointers to CAP482/BCAR-S and DS10141E! A quick
google search and I got both.
Unfortunately, I very much doubt we'll see a publicly-available PDF for the
ASTM specs anytime soon. There are 50 some-odd standards, each in the
~$40 range: http://www.astm.org/SNEWS/ND_2008/stesidebar_nd08.html
In my engineering career I have found the vast majority of these standards
bodies (ASTM/ISO/IEEE,etc.) are primarily set up for $$PROFIT$$ and
providing competitive barriers to entry for anyone but the large
corporations whose employees make up most of the standards committees.
How the design requirements for such a relatively small and publicly
regulated sport/industry like LSA got sucked into one of these things
I just don't know. If you ever do find a copy legally available to the
public, however, please post the link!
Bob Johnson
**************Check all of your email inboxes from anywhere on the web.
Try the new Email Toolbar now!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/mail/download.html?ncid=txtlnkusdown00000027)
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: Just my $.02 |
You poor guys. Why don;t you go by Possum Trot, LA. ? and pick up the Good
Dr. Ed and you all come on over to Georgia and I' ll set you up flying my
XL all day long, Best regards, Bill
In a message dated 4/18/2009 7:25:32 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
psm@att.net writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
Hi Bob,
I wish the world, and the USA, were the utopia you
described. Indeed, it is E-AB builders like you and me who have
already been grounded by the FAA. So we are the first to be hit by
regulatory edict in the USA rather than the last.
Apparently the FAA has, by private edict, stopped all inspectors and
DARs from issuing airworthiness certificates for new E-AB Zodiac XLs
like mine. As you may know, I already decided to ground mine until
the mass balance that the NTSB screamed for is installed on my
plane. So I just beat the FAA by a day or two in forcing my plane to
stay on the ground for an indefinite period.
As of right now, the only USA XLs that are grounded are ones in the
same status as mine and Dr Ed's - built but not yet inspected.
The only way I will allow my Zodiac to fly is after Zenith or some
equivalent source engineers and releases a design change including
aileron mass balancing. It may take longer than that to satisfy the
FAA so they will grant an airworthiness certificate, but I suspect
the same requirements that will satisfy me as the owner and builder
of an XL will also satisfy them.
Paul
XL grounded
At 02:38 AM 4/18/2009, you wrote:
>I certainly hope the FAA doesn't ground the entire 601XL fleet, because
>that violates the original premise of E-AB and creates a terrible
precedent
>for the entire sport. I don't see any sign the FAA intends to take that
>step, thankfully. It's a freedom we have in the U.S. that is sadly not
>shared by our friends overseas, and as always we need to be diligent in
>defending it.
**************Check all of your email inboxes from anywhere on the web.
Try the new Email Toolbar now!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/mail/download.html?ncid=txtlnkusdown00000027)
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: regarding the mass balance BS |
Juan,
According to the message by Roberto Brito on 5/10/08. The plane involved in
the Brazilian crash didn't have its aileron balanced. Here is the relevant
excerpt from the message:
....then we had the aileron balance, we performed some tests and we had neve
r more problems. After that, we called Lopes and recommended him to carry o
ut on aileron balance, but he didn't.
Here is the link to the entire message:
http://www.matronics.com/searching/getmsg_script.cgi?INDEX=71730710?KEYS
=brito?LISTNAME=Zenith?HITNUMBER=7?SERIAL=1910114045?SHOWBUTTONS=
YES
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami Florida
http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom
--- On Sat, 4/18/09, Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net> wrote:
From: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
Subject: Zenith-List: regarding the mass balance BS
to the guys that want mass balance as the be all solution.- Remember the
Brazilian 601 that crashed half a year ago?- it had Massed Balanced wings
..
le, List Admin.
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: | Cable tensions for the HDS |
Jeff,
Within the Construction Manual for the Zodiac Ch 601, the required cable
tension is stated "cable tension 30 - 40 lbs."
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
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! --
|