Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:22 AM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Ken Lilja)
2. 07:22 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Juan Vega)
3. 07:24 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Jim Belcher)
4. 07:39 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Jay Maynard)
5. 07:39 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Jay Maynard)
6. 08:05 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Gig Giacona)
7. 08:12 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Paul Mulwitz)
8. 08:12 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Gig Giacona)
9. 08:22 AM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Jim Belcher)
10. 08:22 AM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Jay Maynard)
11. 08:23 AM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Jay Maynard)
12. 08:43 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (ernie)
13. 09:02 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (T. Graziano)
14. 09:07 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (pavel569)
15. 10:23 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Paul Mulwitz)
16. 10:31 AM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Paul Mulwitz)
17. 10:54 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (PatrickW)
18. 11:52 AM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (annken100)
19. 12:27 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Juan Vega)
20. 12:54 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Paul Mulwitz)
21. 01:27 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (PatrickW)
22. 01:39 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Juan Vega)
23. 01:48 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (chris Sinfield)
24. 01:53 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (annken100)
25. 02:10 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Trainnut01@aol.com)
26. 02:10 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Ken Arnold)
27. 02:21 PM - CYA explanation (was: Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today) (Jim Belcher)
28. 02:21 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Davcoberly@wmconnect.com)
29. 02:46 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Gig Giacona)
30. 02:51 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (LarryMcFarland)
31. 03:12 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Leo Gates)
32. 03:19 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Jim Belcher)
33. 03:24 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Jim Belcher)
34. 04:17 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (ALAN BEYER)
35. 04:23 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (JohnDRead@aol.com)
36. 04:36 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (jonaburns)
37. 04:55 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (ernie)
38. 04:59 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Lawrence Webber)
39. 05:09 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Lawrence Webber)
40. 05:12 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Paul Mulwitz)
41. 06:12 PM - Re: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Leo Gates)
42. 06:29 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (skyriderekm)
43. 10:11 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (T. Graziano)
44. 11:39 PM - Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today (Paul Mulwitz)
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
I can live with the lower V speeds. It is the gross weight reduction
that I am concerned about. I never will be light weight. I hope
"temporary" will be the case.
Ken Lilja
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Paul,
you will most likely not get your wish as mass balancing opens up an engineering
can of worms. and the stick forces will not be modified as this is a little
wing loaded aircraft with a wide speed envelope. I suggest you either finish
the plane and sell it and get a heavy wing loaded aircraft like a Cessna or just
sell the zoidac and movw on. OPtion 3 is finish your plane, and learn to
fly it within its design parameters. You are issing out by not flying your plane.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
>Sent: Jul 7, 2009 8:25 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
>
>First, here is a link to the new letter on Zenith's web site:
>http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/data/c-heintz-letter-7-2009.pdf
>
>Now for the requested comments . . .
>
>I am glad to hear someone from the Zenith/Zenair community actually
>suggest there is a need to do something about all the
>accidents. Reduction of gross weight and airspeed limits certainly
>should help with the future safety record of this design.
>
>I am now more hopeful I will receive "Official" design changes for
>the XL that I decided to wait for before entering flight
>testing. The ones I want are aileron mass balance and control system
>force changes as demanded by the NTSB.
>
>Paul
>XL grounded
>
>
>At 04:50 PM 7/7/2009, you wrote:
>
>>Let's hear some comments on the new Chris Heinz Letter on lowering
>>our Vne and Gross Weight among others! David Coberly 601XL Ready to
>>Fly / Corvair
>>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
On Tuesday 07 July 2009 18:50, Davcoberly@wmconnect.com wrote:
> Let's hear some comments on the new Chris Heinz Letter on lowering our Vne
> and Gross Weight among others! David Coberly 601XL Ready to Fly / Corvair
>From my perspective, it's very simple. The airspeed limitation is easy to do,
and is an operational prodcedure.
The reduction in gross weight is totally unacceptable. The original weight was
marginal in its usefullness. The reduction severely limits the usefulness of
the aircraft.
My wife and I were going to go on our own weight reduction program, and limit
the amount of baggage to fly the aircraft. Now, it simply won't carry both of
us. I can't wait to explain this to her!
Does this mean the original design calculations were incorrect, or that this
is a CYA?
--
============================================
Do not archive.
============================================
Jim B Belcher
BS, MS Physics, Math, Computer Science
A&P/IA
Retired aerospace technical manager
============================================
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:18:54AM -0400, Juan Vega wrote:
> Paul, you will most likely not get your wish as mass balancing opens up an
> engineering can of worms. and the stick forces will not be modified as
> this is a little wing loaded aircraft with a wide speed envelope. I
> suggest you either finish the plane and sell it and get a heavy wing
> loaded aircraft like a Cessna or just sell the zoidac and movw on. OPtion
> 3 is finish your plane, and learn to fly it within its design parameters.
> You are issing out by not flying your plane.
The answer "no" is *ALWAYS* acceptable to the question "will we fly this
airplane today?". Paul obviously chooses to answer that question differently
from you.
It is *NEVER* acceptable to try to twist another pilot's arm to go flying if
he feels it is unsafe. Period. Please stop doing it.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, CFI-SP 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 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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 09:27:06AM -0500, Jim Belcher wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 July 2009 18:50, Davcoberly@wmconnect.com wrote:
> > Let's hear some comments on the new Chris Heinz Letter on lowering our Vne
> > and Gross Weight among others! David Coberly 601XL Ready to Fly / Corvair
> From my perspective, it's very simple. The airspeed limitation is easy to do,
> and is an operational prodcedure.
Indeed. 140 MPH is 121.65 knots; the top of the green is 108 KIAS, and I've
only had it up to 120 once in a power-on descent in absolutely smooth air. I
don't think this one will affect anyone.
> The reduction in gross weight is totally unacceptable. The original weight was
> marginal in its usefullness. The reduction severely limits the usefulness of
> the aircraft.
Absolutely. Basically, I'm now restricted to solo flight.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, CFI-SP http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (KFRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC http://www.tronguy.net/N55ZC.shtml
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
z601(at)anemicaardvark.co wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 July 2009 18:50, Davcoberly@wmconnect.com wrote:
> Does this mean the original design calculations were incorrect, or that this
> is a CYA?
> --
The original 1320 has been flown for years by a large number of airplanes. In all
of the design studies that have been done, including those by our friends at
ZBAG, it has only been called it into question where the +/- 6G Ultimate load
are concerned. So yes I'd have to say it is a case of CYA.
Since I'm building an EXP-HB and I get to write the POH. I think an even lower
manuvering speed when loaded above 1255 will have the same effect. I will, of
course, do some research and finally testing during my 40 hours to back that up.
--------
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=252107#252107
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
At 07:18 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
HI Juan,
I don't understand you. You have said about ten times now that I
should give up my nearly life long project to build a Zodiac. Why do
you keep saying that.
First, I have ignored your opinion on my life's direction many times
before and will continue to do so.
Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes
you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
Third, your latest nonsense that I should get a better airplane and
not continue down the path of completion for my Zodiac seems the most
outrageous comment you have made to date. Why do you think I could
use such a plane when I have told you and the list many times that I
don't have a medical and can't fly anything other than LSA?
How is it that you KNOW what will not happen with regard to the XL
design enhancement?
Or perhaps, you just keep ignoring what I say just like I keep
ignoring what you say.
The simple truth is that the NTSB has DEMANDED mass balance for the
ailerons and control system redesign. I am confident that will
happen at some point. Perhaps it has already been done for the LAA
exercise. We will learn more about those secret design changes when
the LAA completes its test program. I am sure it includes mass
balance for the ailerons and other design improvements, but I am not
sure what other improvements.
Now that Chris has admitted through his new reductions in safe flight
and weight parameters for the XL that the design needs work, I am
more optimistic than ever that we will get the changes that are
clearly needed. So, why do you continue to tell me to go away and
get a better plane?
Paul
XL grounded
>
>Paul,
>you will most likely not get your wish as mass balancing opens up an
>engineering can of worms. and the stick forces will not be modified
>as this is a little wing loaded aircraft with a wide speed
>envelope. I suggest you either finish the plane and sell it and get
>a heavy wing loaded aircraft like a Cessna or just sell the zoidac
>and movw on. OPtion 3 is finish your plane, and learn to fly it
>within its design parameters. You are issing out by not flying your plane.
>
>Juan
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
jmaynard wrote:
> It is *NEVER* acceptable to try to twist another pilot's arm to go flying if
> he feels it is unsafe. Period. Please stop doing it.
Nobody is trying to twist anyones arm into flying. But if a person has decided
that they are not going to fly a plane without a certain modification from the
designer and there is a very good chance if not a near certainty that that the
modification in question is not going to come then they need to either get rid
of the plane or design the modification themselves, install it and test it.
But it is probably a good idea that someone who doesn't have reading comprehension
skills and has no understanding of the limits of regulatory power of the NTSB
not be out flying.
--------
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=252110#252110
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
On Tuesday 07 July 2009 19:48, Gig Giacona wrote:
>
> There are the design changes.
>
> VNE 140
> MGW 1255#s
In reading the letter from Chris Heintz, I note several things:
1) These are recommended procedures.
2) They appear to be temporary until the real problems can be ascertained.
3) There seems to be an implicit admission there really is a problem(s).
I think I see an admission that there is (are) a problems, as yet
unidentified, but they do not yet know what the actual problem(s) are. They
seem to be hopeful they can be identified, and that the restrictions will be
lifted.
Asking for reduced speed and weight reduces the overall structural
requirements on the aircraft, which may very well reduce the problem(s).
After all, we beef up aircraft structural design to carrry more load and go
faster. Reducing the load and the speed should reduce the workload on the
structure. However, I also see this as placing Chris Heintz on record in a
proactive role.
Since these restrictions reduce the usefullness of the aircraft substantially,
I hope we see an early resolution to these issues. If not, there may well be
some aviation lawyers who are the only winners in the whole issue.
Meanwhile, I need to get back in my shop and continue work on my new single
place aircraft. It's called a Z601XL. Ever hear of it?
--
============================================
Do not archive.
============================================
Jim B Belcher
BS, MS Physics, Math, Computer Science
A&P/IA
Retired aerospace technical manager
============================================
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 08:04:39AM -0700, Gig Giacona wrote:
> Since I'm building an EXP-HB and I get to write the POH. I think an even
> lower manuvering speed when loaded above 1255 will have the same effect. I
> will, of course, do some research and finally testing during my 40 hours
> to back that up.
You might want to rethink this, Gig. Maneuvering speed goes up when gross
weight goes up, not down. My POH says that maneuvering speed is 90 KIAS at
1320 pounds, dropping to 84 KIAS at 1150 pounds.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, CFI-SP 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 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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 08:11:39AM -0700, Gig Giacona wrote:
> jmaynard wrote:
> > It is *NEVER* acceptable to try to twist another pilot's arm to go flying if
> > he feels it is unsafe. Period. Please stop doing it.
> Nobody is trying to twist anyones arm into flying.
That's sure what Juan looks like he's doing.
> But if a person has decided that they are not going to fly a plane without
> a certain modification from the designer and there is a very good chance
> if not a near certainty that that the modification in question is not
> going to come then they need to either get rid of the plane or design the
> modification themselves, install it and test it.
I would agree if there wasn't just such a mod being tested in the UK right
now. I believe that, when those results are in, the mod will be made
available for the Zodiac community in general, and probably mandated for AMD
aircraft by safety letter.
> But it is probably a good idea that someone who doesn't have reading
> comprehension skills and has no understanding of the limits of regulatory
> power of the NTSB not be out flying.
Then why is Juan still flying? Gig, that one cuts both ways. Just because
the NTSB does not have regulatory power does not diminish their expertise
and the force of their recommendations.
I'm satisfied by the German testing that there's not a problem as long as
aileron control cable tensions are properly maintained. However, when the
unanimous guidance of the aeronautical engineering community is that reying
on cable tension alone is insufficient, I don't consider it unreasonable to
not fly until another means of flutter prevention is available.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, CFI-SP 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 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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
---> The simple truth is that the NTSB has DEMANDED mass balance for
the ailerons
The NTSB can demand that LSA rules be revised and changed. But Lucky
for us they cant tell us how to build OUR planes. Demand all you want
it does not mean anything
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Paul Mulwitz<psm@att.net> wrote:
>
> At 07:18 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
> HI Juan,
>
> I don't understand you. You have said about ten times now that I should
> give up my nearly life long project to build a Zodiac. Why do you keep
> saying that.
>
> First, I have ignored your opinion on my life's direction many times before
> and will continue to do so.
>
> Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly my plane
> for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me and that makes
> it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes you think my pilot
> skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
>
> Third, your latest nonsense that I should get a better airplane and not
> continue down the path of completion for my Zodiac seems the most outrageous
> comment you have made to date. Why do you think I could use such a plane
> when I have told you and the list many times that I don't have a medical and
> can't fly anything other than LSA?
>
> How is it that you KNOW what will not happen with regard to the XL design
> enhancement?
>
> Or perhaps, you just keep ignoring what I say just like I keep ignoring what
> you say.
>
> The simple truth is that the NTSB has DEMANDED mass balance for the ailerons
> and control system redesign. I am confident that will happen at some point.
> Perhaps it has already been done for the LAA exercise. We will learn more
> about those secret design changes when the LAA completes its test program.
> I am sure it includes mass balance for the ailerons and other design
> improvements, but I am not sure what other improvements.
>
> Now that Chris has admitted through his new reductions in safe flight and
> weight parameters for the XL that the design needs work, I am more
> optimistic than ever that we will get the changes that are clearly needed.
> So, why do you continue to tell me to go away and get a better plane?
>
> Paul
> XL grounded
>
>
>>
>> Paul,
>> you will most likely not get your wish as mass balancing opens up an
>> engineering can of worms. and the stick forces will not be modified as this
>> is a little wing loaded aircraft with a wide speed envelope. I suggest you
>> either finish the plane and sell it and get a heavy wing loaded aircraft
>> like a Cessna or just sell the zoidac and movw on. OPtion 3 is finish your
>> plane, and learn to fly it within its design parameters. You are issing out
>> by not flying your plane.
>>
>> Juan
>
>
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Paul,
In reply to your statement:
" The ones I want are aileron mass balance and control system force
changes as demanded by the NTSB".
Unless I am reading the NTSB report wrong,
Page 11 of the NTSB report has the "Recommendations" not "Demands" that:
a Ground Vibration Test be conducted and "consideration" of
mass-balanced ailerons,
and an "evaluation" the stick force gradient at max aft CG and
notification to the pilots of the stick-force gradient that occurs at
the aft cg, especially at higher G forces.
Since most of us, or possibly none of us, have ever had access to or
have read the forwarding letter of ZBAG to the NTSB, is it possible that
ZBAG letter had the "Demands"???
Tony Graziano
XL/Jab; N493TG; 509 hrs
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Mulwitz
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
First, here is a link to the new letter on Zenith's web site:
http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/data/c-heintz-letter-7-2009.pdf
Now for the requested comments . . .
I am glad to hear someone from the Zenith/Zenair community actually
suggest there is a need to do something about all the accidents.
Reduction of gross weight and airspeed limits certainly should help with
the future safety record of this design.
I am now more hopeful I will receive "Official" design changes for the
XL that I decided to wait for before entering flight testing. The ones
I want are aileron mass balance and control system force changes as
demanded by the NTSB.
Paul
XL grounded
At 04:50 PM 7/7/2009, you wrote:
Let's hear some comments on the new Chris Heinz Letter on lowering
our Vne and Gross Weight among others! David Coberly 601XL Ready to Fly
/ Corvair
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
> Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
> my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
> and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes
> you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
>
Paul,
I agree that Juan's comments are often very offensive and sometimes inappropriate
but I must say that in this case, he is probably right.
If I'd ever call the plane I'm building with the dream of flying it once "a death
trap", the next the day it will be for sale. It means you have zero confidence
in your Zodiac and mass balance or stick stiffness modes can bring it up a
little but you'll still fly it with the vision on wing flying away. Where is
the fun of flying, then?
Nothing personal, I just don't want a fellow builder to call my plane these names
unless it is true.
--------
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=252122#252122
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Hi Tony,
First, let me say I have no knowledge of ZBAG letters or any other
activities of that group. I am not a member and really don't care
what they say or do.
As to the language of the NTSB, I will yield to your interpretation
of the exact points. My take is that they DEMANDED that the entire
fleet of XLs be grounded until the safety issues are resolved. If I
have overemphasized the aileron mass balance or control gradient
change, then I apologize.
Still, the decision I made is to ground my plane until those
specific changes have been made and approved by appropriate
engineers and organizations (e.g. Zenith). You might think the
German tests negate the need for aileron mass balance, but I
don't. That is because all the experts I have spoken to on this
subject say the balance is needed whether aileron flutter can be
proved to be a problem or not. This includes a number of high
ranking FAA safety folks and also a number of highly experienced
kitplane folks. For me to drop the need for aileron mass balance
would take at least the NTSB saying it isn't needed - something I
doubt I will ever see.
I realize I am being very conservative on my decision point and that
other people can and should make their own decisions. However, I
wonder if all the people who are continuing to fly their XLs had
another airplane in their hangar they would still choose to fly the
XL. Besides being a safety decision it winds up being a financial
decision too.
Paul
XL Grounded
At 08:56 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>Page 11 of the NTSB report has the "Recommendations" not "Demands" that:
>
>a Ground Vibration Test be conducted and "consideration" of
>mass-balanced ailerons,
>and an "evaluation" the stick force gradient at max aft CG and
>notification to the pilots of the stick-force gradient that occurs
>at the aft cg, especially at higher G forces.
>
>Since most of us, or possibly none of us, have ever had access to or
>have read the forwarding letter of ZBAG to the NTSB, is it possible
>that ZBAG letter had the "Demands"???
>
>Tony Graziano
>XL/Jab; N493TG; 509 hrs
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Hi Pavel,
I agree with your point . . . in general. However, there are a
couple of issues I consider important that you didn't mention.
First, I have dedicated a great deal of time and money in building my
XL. I would really like to finish the project by flying it and
getting it through phase 1 testing. Having an unfinished project
really annoys me.
Second, I think the XL is generally safe, but has some nasty risks
associated with it. I believe the NTSB has taken all the appropriate
considerations in mind and proposed a reasonable solution that would
make this a safe airplane. This is subject to further analysis by
experts and might be modified in the future. Still, I think there is
a "Solution" to the high risks of structural failure that have shown
themselves in a relatively large number of fatal events.
I am willing to wait for the issues to be resolved before flying my
plane. I am not yet willing to give up on it completely.
Paul
XL grounded
At 09:06 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>
>
> > Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
> > my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
> > and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes
> > you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
> >
>
>
>Paul,
>I agree that Juan's comments are often very offensive and sometimes
>inappropriate but I must say that in this case, he is probably right.
>If I'd ever call the plane I'm building with the dream of flying it
>once "a death trap", the next the day it will be for sale. It means
>you have zero confidence in your Zodiac and mass balance or stick
>stiffness modes can bring it up a little but you'll still fly it
>with the vision on wing flying away. Where is the fun of flying, then?
>Nothing personal, I just don't want a fellow builder to call my
>plane these names unless it is true.
>
>--------
>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=252122#252122
>
>
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Gig Giacona wrote:
>
>
> VNE 140
> MGW 1255#s
Any ramifications for those who are about to begin Phase 1 testing...?
- Pat
--------
Patrick
XL/650/Corvair
N63PZ (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252144#252144
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
I wish Zenith would publish more complete information. The letter from Chris is
certainly a cliff-hanger. What "airplane issues" have they identified? What
kind of improvements is Zenith working on? What kind of a time-table can we
expect for these changes? I guess we'll have to wait until Oshkosh to find out.
The recommended 1255 pound gross weight limit is problematic for me. I was planning
on losing some weight, but this is ridiculous. I wonder if I can get Zenith
to pay for a Weight Watchers membership?
Ken Pavlou
--------
601 XL / Corvair
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252155#252155
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Paul says- "Now that Chris has admitted through his new reductions in safe flight
>and weight parameters for the XL that the design needs work, I am
>more optimistic than ever that we will get the changes that are
>clearly needed."
Juan - dude the changes are probably negligable, mostly to apprease the few that
for some reason fail to comprehend they are the manufacturers.
Paul says- "So, why do you continue to tell me to go away and
>get a better plane?"
Juan- Paul, it is clear you are not happy, fail to understand you are the manufacturer
and blame others for your plane not flying. I did not say to go get a
better plane, never said that Paul, there you go again not listening/ reading.
Paul says "attack on manhood"
Juan says" i offered to fly your plane for you are an honest offer, dont want
it, no skin off my back, I am amazed frankly how thin your skin is. Funny how
Sabrina said to chear up and go fly your plane and you thought" oh how cute,
she is so smart..." Juan says the same, trying to encourage you to fly the plane
you built, and its " O God! the quality of my Cojones are being questioned"
. too funny.
The facts as they are:
601 has been test to adnausium, no issues found, but to apprease the few, Heintz
will continue to study further,
we need to look in the mirror, and ask our selves "is my plane flyable, did I
as the builder do a good job?"
The offer to fly your plane was an honest offer, not meant to threaten your skills
or Cojones (thats balls in Spanish),
When I built mine, even the second 601 I helped build, it was a very intimidating
thing to get in it and go I wold have loved the offer from someone.
The offer to help you still stands.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
>Sent: Jul 8, 2009 11:04
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
>
>
>At 07:18 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>HI Juan,
>
>I don't understand you. You have said about ten times now that I
>should give up my nearly life long project to build a Zodiac. Why do
>you keep saying that.
>
>First, I have ignored your opinion on my life's direction many times
>before and will continue to do so.
>
>Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
>my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
>and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes
>you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
>
>Third, your latest nonsense that I should get a better airplane and
>not continue down the path of completion for my Zodiac seems the most
>outrageous comment you have made to date. Why do you think I could
>use such a plane when I have told you and the list many times that I
>don't have a medical and can't fly anything other than LSA?
>
>How is it that you KNOW what will not happen with regard to the XL
>design enhancement?
>
>Or perhaps, you just keep ignoring what I say just like I keep
>ignoring what you say.
>
>The simple truth is that the NTSB has DEMANDED mass balance for the
>ailerons and control system redesign. I am confident that will
>happen at some point. Perhaps it has already been done for the LAA
>exercise. We will learn more about those secret design changes when
>the LAA completes its test program. I am sure it includes mass
>balance for the ailerons and other design improvements, but I am not
>sure what other improvements.
>
>Now that Chris has admitted through his new reductions in safe flight
>and weight parameters for the XL that the design needs work, I am
>more optimistic than ever that we will get the changes that are
>clearly needed. So, why do you continue to tell me to go away and
>get a better plane?
>
>Paul
>XL grounded
>
>
>>
>>Paul,
>>you will most likely not get your wish as mass balancing opens up an
>>engineering can of worms. and the stick forces will not be modified
>>as this is a little wing loaded aircraft with a wide speed
>>envelope. I suggest you either finish the plane and sell it and get
>>a heavy wing loaded aircraft like a Cessna or just sell the zoidac
>>and movw on. OPtion 3 is finish your plane, and learn to fly it
>>within its design parameters. You are issing out by not flying your plane.
>>
>>Juan
>
>
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Hi Juan,
Thank you for the offer to help. I really mean that. I truly believe
you want to be helpful and not offensive.
I am amazed at how firmly you want to believe in the XL
design. After the designer himself has clearly admitted there are
flaws that need to be fixed you claim his announcement is only to
appease " . . . the few that for some reason fail to comprehend they
are the manufacturers."
Indeed, kit builders are only manufacturers - not designers. We paid
for a finished, competent, design to build along with high quality
parts and documentation of the competent design. Now that it has
become apparent to nearly everyone in the world that there is a
problem with the design it is up to the designer and/or design seller
and kit manufacturer to deal with the problem.
If you really want to help me along the path of completion of my XL
then join me in asking Zenith and its partners to design and release
improvements to the design. I would like to see the ones asked for
by the NTSB. If you think there are other ones that have been
established as being needed then ask for them too.
And yes, I admit I think Sabrina is both cute and smart. I also
realize she is very young and in need of considerable development
before she reaches her peak. I am happy to encourage her, and even
to mentor her, as much as I can. You see, she is a young person who
strives to become a major league engineer. I am a retired major
league engineer. What I do to encourage and possibly help her reach
her goal is as much about me as it is about her. The fact that I
have become aware of her and her goals because of our common activity
building Zodiacs (and communicating on this email forum) is the
primary reason I can help her. I would like to think I would do as
much for anyone else with her talents, accomplishments, and goals.
Paul
XL grounded
do not archive
At 12:25 PM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>Juan - dude the changes are probably negligable, mostly to apprease
>the few that for some reason fail to comprehend they are the manufacturers.
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
annken100 wrote:
> The recommended 1255 pound gross weight limit is problematic for me. I was planning
on losing some weight, but this is ridiculous.
I have already lost 34 lbs (which more than makes up for the weight of my BRS).
I'm a fairly big guy to begin with, and I don't know how realistic it is to
be able to lose very much more.
I guess I could ask my wife to lose some weight, but somehow I don't think that
would go over very well...
Patrick
XL/650/Corvair/BRS
90% and getting closer every day...
http://picasaweb.google.com/Patrick.hoyt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252171#252171
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Paul said - Indeed, kit builders are only manufacturers - not designers. We paid
for a finished, competent, design to build along with high quality
parts and documentation of the competent design. Now that it has
become apparent to nearly everyone in the world that there is a
problem with the design it is up to the designer and/or design seller
and kit manufacturer to deal with the problem.
Juan response-" I am sorry to say but you are complete off the mark with regard
to CH's responsibilty to us. We bought an experimental Kit, and as such assume
all the risks. this is not legos. and there is nothing written any where
that documents a problem , they have not found one, so you are asking to fix
a problem that has not been found. I like the quote from the 1905 45 cal pistol
"if it aint broke...." All data indicates no outstanding issues, so the designer
has offered to do something to keep the Nay sayers at bay, far from agreeing
there is an issue.
So we we agree to disagree. Lets move on.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
>Sent: Jul 8, 2009 3:54 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
>
>
>Hi Juan,
>
>Thank you for the offer to help. I really mean that. I truly believe
>you want to be helpful and not offensive.
>
>I am amazed at how firmly you want to believe in the XL
>design. After the designer himself has clearly admitted there are
>flaws that need to be fixed you claim his announcement is only to
>appease " . . . the few that for some reason fail to comprehend they
>are the manufacturers."
>
>Indeed, kit builders are only manufacturers - not designers. We paid
>for a finished, competent, design to build along with high quality
>parts and documentation of the competent design. Now that it has
>become apparent to nearly everyone in the world that there is a
>problem with the design it is up to the designer and/or design seller
>and kit manufacturer to deal with the problem.
>
>If you really want to help me along the path of completion of my XL
>then join me in asking Zenith and its partners to design and release
>improvements to the design. I would like to see the ones asked for
>by the NTSB. If you think there are other ones that have been
>established as being needed then ask for them too.
>
>And yes, I admit I think Sabrina is both cute and smart. I also
>realize she is very young and in need of considerable development
>before she reaches her peak. I am happy to encourage her, and even
>to mentor her, as much as I can. You see, she is a young person who
>strives to become a major league engineer. I am a retired major
>league engineer. What I do to encourage and possibly help her reach
>her goal is as much about me as it is about her. The fact that I
>have become aware of her and her goals because of our common activity
>building Zodiacs (and communicating on this email forum) is the
>primary reason I can help her. I would like to think I would do as
>much for anyone else with her talents, accomplishments, and goals.
>
>Paul
>XL grounded
>do not archive
>
>
>At 12:25 PM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>>Juan - dude the changes are probably negligable, mostly to apprease
>>the few that for some reason fail to comprehend they are the manufacturers.
>
>
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Does this mean the original design calculations were incorrect, or that this
is a CYA?
OK what is CYA????
Chris.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252175#252175
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
chris Sinfield wrote:
> Does this mean the original design calculations were incorrect, or that this
> is a CYA?
>
>
> OK what is CYA????
> Chris.
Great, a question I can answer confidently! CYA= Cover Your Ass
The definition as obtained from Wikipedia:
CYA - procedures or practices that are purely defensive against legal penalties,
criticism, or other potentially punitive measures. The polite explanation of
the abbreviation is "consider yourself accountable".
Ken Pavlou
--------
601 XL / Corvair
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252176#252176
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
If I keep losing weight at the same rate I am now, and building my airplane
at the same rate I am now, I won't weigh but twelve pounds when I'm ready
to test fly.
Carroll
do not archive
**************Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals.
(http://personals.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntuslove00000003)
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Yea...........let's hear it for legos!
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
>
> Paul said - Indeed, kit builders are only manufacturers - not designers.
> We paid
> for a finished, competent, design to build along with high quality
> parts and documentation of the competent design. Now that it has
> become apparent to nearly everyone in the world that there is a
> problem with the design it is up to the designer and/or design seller
> and kit manufacturer to deal with the problem.
>
> Juan response-" I am sorry to say but you are complete off the mark with
> regard to CH's responsibilty to us. We bought an experimental Kit, and as
> such assume all the risks. this is not legos. and there is nothing
> written any where that documents a problem , they have not found one, so
> you are asking to fix a problem that has not been found. I like the quote
> from the 1905 45 cal pistol "if it aint broke...." All data indicates no
> outstanding issues, so the designer has offered to do something to keep
> the Nay sayers at bay, far from agreeing there is an issue.
> So we we agree to disagree. Lets move on.
>
> Juan
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
>>Sent: Jul 8, 2009 3:54 PM
>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
>>
>>
>>Hi Juan,
>>
>>Thank you for the offer to help. I really mean that. I truly believe
>>you want to be helpful and not offensive.
>>
>>I am amazed at how firmly you want to believe in the XL
>>design. After the designer himself has clearly admitted there are
>>flaws that need to be fixed you claim his announcement is only to
>>appease " . . . the few that for some reason fail to comprehend they
>>are the manufacturers."
>>
>>Indeed, kit builders are only manufacturers - not designers. We paid
>>for a finished, competent, design to build along with high quality
>>parts and documentation of the competent design. Now that it has
>>become apparent to nearly everyone in the world that there is a
>>problem with the design it is up to the designer and/or design seller
>>and kit manufacturer to deal with the problem.
>>
>>If you really want to help me along the path of completion of my XL
>>then join me in asking Zenith and its partners to design and release
>>improvements to the design. I would like to see the ones asked for
>>by the NTSB. If you think there are other ones that have been
>>established as being needed then ask for them too.
>>
>>And yes, I admit I think Sabrina is both cute and smart. I also
>>realize she is very young and in need of considerable development
>>before she reaches her peak. I am happy to encourage her, and even
>>to mentor her, as much as I can. You see, she is a young person who
>>strives to become a major league engineer. I am a retired major
>>league engineer. What I do to encourage and possibly help her reach
>>her goal is as much about me as it is about her. The fact that I
>>have become aware of her and her goals because of our common activity
>>building Zodiacs (and communicating on this email forum) is the
>>primary reason I can help her. I would like to think I would do as
>>much for anyone else with her talents, accomplishments, and goals.
>>
>>Paul
>>XL grounded
>>do not archive
>>
>>
>>At 12:25 PM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>>>Juan - dude the changes are probably negligable, mostly to apprease
>>>the few that for some reason fail to comprehend they are the
>>>manufacturers.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today) |
On Wednesday 08 July 2009 15:47, chris Sinfield wrote:
> <chris_sinfield@yahoo.com.au>
>
> Does this mean the original design calculations were incorrect, or that
> this is a CYA?
>
>
> OK what is CYA????
> Chris.
CYA is a technical term sometimes used by engineers to describe actions taken
to prevent future criticism of prior actions. It could be paraphrased as
meaning, "cover your posterior." :-)
--
============================================
Do not archive.
============================================
Jim B Belcher
BS, MS Physics, Math, Computer Science
A&P/IA
Retired aerospace technical manager
============================================
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
In a message dated 7/8/2009 3:48:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
pwhoyt@yahoo.com writes:
> I guess I could ask my wife to lose some weight, but somehow I don't
> think that would go over very well...
Trust me Pat I tried that and it did not go well to say the least! :)
David Coberly
do not archive!!
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Paul said - Indeed, kit builders are only manufacturers - not designers. We paid
for a finished, competent, design to build along with high quality
parts and documentation of the competent design. Now that it has
become apparent to nearly everyone in the world that there is a
problem with the design it is up to the designer and/or design seller
and kit manufacturer to deal with the problem.
No in fact if you built a Zenith you signed an agreement with these three paragraphs...
10. Custom-built aircraft are licensed by the government to fly in the applicable
Experimental, Amateur-Built or Ultralight, etc. category. Each aircraft is
treated
legally by the governing authority (FAA) as a one-of-a-kind in design and construction,
and is liable to be unpredictable, hazardous, and even potentially lethal.
Therefore, construction and operation of such aircraft may be unsafe without acquiring,
studying and complying to the letter of all instructions and manuals
pertaining thereto. The Seller does not warrant that the aircraft as constructed
by the buyer, or any other person, will be airworthy, or will qualify for certification
or
registration by aviation authorities, or will meet the requirement of the buyer.
Notwithstanding the forgoing, seller may provide from time to time, but is not
required
to provide, technical assistance during the assembly, installation and construction
process. However, buyer and seller specifically agree that responsibility
for
building the aircraft or its parts shall rest solely with the buyer and that no
liability shall arise from or extend from any technical assistance provided by
seller.
Purchaser acknowledges that the assembly and construction of the product requires
certain technical experience and skill. Further seller and purchaser specifically
agree that the seller cannot and does not warrant the ability of any individual,
including purchaser, to properly assemble, construct and maintain an aircraft
kit of
the kind sold by seller. In exchange for such technical assistance, purchaser and
seller specifically agree that purchaser shall hold harmless seller from any
and all
liability which may arise from any technical advice provided by seller, sellers
employee, or sellers agent.
11. EXCLUSIONS OF WARRANTIES, NO WARRANTIES. THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY
AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE AND ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE EXCLUDED FROM THIS TRANSACTION
AND SHALL NOT APPLY TO
THE GOODS SOLD, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GOODS, THE PLANS & MANUALS, THE GOODS WORKMANSHIP,
THE SAFETY OF THE
GOODS DESIGN OR ANY OF THE GOODS COMPONENTS.
--------
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=252183#252183
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Patience guys,
The work that Chris Heintz is doing right now is not one of identifying
a fault in the design, but finding a weakest link(s) or area of the
design that can be improved. The complexity of the design lends itself
to a few percentages of failure that could be attributed to
construction, flying history, loading and all of these contribute to a
method of determining specific improvements to the design. It will be
solved, but perhaps without a formal declaration of exactitude. They are
doing the right thing by examining everything as closely as possible to
find what is either a multi-mode problem or a single point of failure
and cause.
Do fly safe,
Larry McFarland 601HDS Stratus Subaru with 137 hours at
www.macsmachine.com <http://www.macsmachine.com/>
annken100 wrote:
>
> I wish Zenith would publish more complete information. The letter from Chris
is certainly a cliff-hanger. What "airplane issues" have they identified? What
kind of improvements is Zenith working on? What kind of a time-table can
we expect for these changes? I guess we'll have to wait until Oshkosh to find
out.
>
> The recommended 1255 pound gross weight limit is problematic for me. I was planning
on losing some weight, but this is ridiculous. I wonder if I can get
Zenith to pay for a Weight Watchers membership?
>
>
> Ken Pavlou
>
> --------
> 601 XL / Corvair
>
>
>
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
All- I just gotta weigh in. My HDS at 1200 lbs GTW is somewhat below
the new proposed XL limit of 1255 lbs. I do have a question. Chris, in
his letter says, "Reduce aircraft gross weight to 1255 pounds (i.e. no
baggage)." What does that mean? GTW equals 1255 pounds PLUS baggage?
Back to my HDS. At 674 pounds empty I can add 20 gallons of fuel (120
lbs), myself (165 lbs), my wife (175 lbs) and 66 pounds of baggage. I
intend to fly only 3 hour legs max. as my wife and I only have three
hour bladders so remove one hour of fuel (4 gal or 24 lbs) from the five
I have and I can carry 90 lbs of baggage, cruise at 125 MPH and it is
light sport qualified.
Am I happy with my choice? You betcha!
Do not archive.
Leo Gates
N601Z
chris Sinfield wrote:
>
> Does this mean the original design calculations were incorrect, or that this
> is a CYA?
>
>
> OK what is CYA????
> Chris.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252175#252175
>
>
>
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
On Wednesday 08 July 2009 16:45, LarryMcFarland wrote:
>
> Patience guys,
>
> The work that Chris Heintz is doing right now is not one of identifying
> a fault in the design, but finding a weakest link(s) or area of the
> design that can be improved. The complexity of the design lends itself
> to a few percentages of failure that could be attributed to
> construction, flying history, loading and all of these contribute to a
> method of determining specific improvements to the design. It will be
> solved, but perhaps without a formal declaration of exactitude. They are
> doing the right thing by examining everything as closely as possible to
> find what is either a multi-mode problem or a single point of failure
> and cause.
....but we want our answers now, even if they're wrong. :-)
============================================
Do not archive.
============================================
Jim B Belcher
BS, MS Physics, Math, Computer Science
A&P/IA
Retired aerospace technical manager
============================================
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
On Wednesday 08 July 2009 17:02, Leo Gates wrote:
>
> All- I just gotta weigh in. My HDS at 1200 lbs GTW is somewhat below
> the new proposed XL limit of 1255 lbs. I do have a question. Chris, in
> his letter says, "Reduce aircraft gross weight to 1255 pounds (i.e. no
> baggage)." What does that mean? GTW equals 1255 pounds PLUS baggage?
I suspect, but do not know, that he means the weight limitation effectively
eliminates the possibility of baggage if two people are on board.
> Back to my HDS. At 674 pounds empty I can add 20 gallons of fuel (120
> lbs), myself (165 lbs), my wife (175 lbs) and 66 pounds of baggage. I
> intend to fly only 3 hour legs max. as my wife and I only have three
> hour bladders so remove one hour of fuel (4 gal or 24 lbs) from the five
> I have and I can carry 90 lbs of baggage, cruise at 125 MPH and it is
> light sport qualified.
I looked hard at the HDS, but (in part) rejected it because of the limited
fuel. It's a personal choice: I tend to do a lot of cross countries. I climb
high, reduce the power, trim out, and stay there for 4 1/2 to 5 hours.
I also rejected an Ercoupe because of the limited load carrying capabilty.
Just now it looks like that might have been the better choice. Time will
tell.
--
============================================
Do not archive.
============================================
Jim B Belcher
BS, MS Physics, Math, Computer Science
A&P/IA
Retired aerospace technical manager
============================================
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Hi Jim,=0A=0AHow much fuel do you want to carry?- I have an HDS and can c
arry 29 Gal. of usable fuel.- I have flown from Oshkosh to SnF and have b
een out west a couple of times. I have also flown 4 1/2 Hour legs.-On my
normal cross country flights I will burn off the wing tanks (21 Gal.) and t
hen land with 8 Gal. left in the header tank.=0A=0AAl From Oshkosh- =0A
=0A=0A(Jim said)=0A"I looked hard at the HDS, but (in part) rejected it bec
ause of the limited =0Afuel. It's a personal choice: I tend to do a lot of
cross countries. I climb =0Ahigh, reduce the power, trim out, and stay ther
e for 4 1/2 to 5 hours".
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
I still think that you should all design, build and fly your own aircraft
and get off your high horses with opinion and inuendo regarding the Zenith
designs.
John Read
CH701 - Elbert CO - Jabiru 3300
Phone: 303-648-3261
Fax: 303-648-3262
Cell: 719-494-4567
In a message dated 7/8/2009 1:27:43 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time,
amyvega2005@earthlink.net writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
Paul says- "Now that Chris has admitted through his new reductions in safe
flight
>and weight parameters for the XL that the design needs work, I am
>more optimistic than ever that we will get the changes that are
>clearly needed."
Juan - dude the changes are probably negligable, mostly to apprease the
few that for some reason fail to comprehend they are the manufacturers.
Paul says- "So, why do you continue to tell me to go away and
>get a better plane?"
Juan- Paul, it is clear you are not happy, fail to understand you are the
manufacturer and blame others for your plane not flying. I did not say to
go get a better plane, never said that Paul, there you go again not
listening/ reading.
Paul says "attack on manhood"
Juan says" i offered to fly your plane for you are an honest offer, dont
want it, no skin off my back, I am amazed frankly how thin your skin is.
Funny how Sabrina said to chear up and go fly your plane and you thought"
oh how cute, she is so smart..." Juan says the same, trying to encourage you
to fly the plane you built, and its " O God! the quality of my Cojones
are being questioned" . too funny.
The facts as they are:
601 has been test to adnausium, no issues found, but to apprease the few,
Heintz will continue to study further,
we need to look in the mirror, and ask our selves "is my plane flyable,
did I as the builder do a good job?"
The offer to fly your plane was an honest offer, not meant to threaten
your skills or Cojones (thats balls in Spanish),
When I built mine, even the second 601 I helped build, it was a very
intimidating thing to get in it and go I wold have loved the offer from
someone.
The offer to help you still stands.
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
>Sent: Jul 8, 2009 11:04
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
>
>At 07:18 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>HI Juan,
>
>I don't understand you. You have said about ten times now that I
>should give up my nearly life long project to build a Zodiac. Why do
>you keep saying that.
>
>First, I have ignored your opinion on my life's direction many times
>before and will continue to do so.
>
>Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
>my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
>and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes
>you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
>
>Third, your latest nonsense that I should get a better airplane and
>not continue down the path of completion for my Zodiac seems the most
>outrageous comment you have made to date. Why do you think I could
>use such a plane when I have told you and the list many times that I
>don't have a medical and can't fly anything other than LSA?
>
>How is it that you KNOW what will not happen with regard to the XL
>design enhancement?
>
>Or perhaps, you just keep ignoring what I say just like I keep
>ignoring what you say.
>
>The simple truth is that the NTSB has DEMANDED mass balance for the
>ailerons and control system redesign. I am confident that will
>happen at some point. Perhaps it has already been done for the LAA
>exercise. We will learn more about those secret design changes when
>the LAA completes its test program. I am sure it includes mass
>balance for the ailerons and other design improvements, but I am not
>sure what other improvements.
>
>Now that Chris has admitted through his new reductions in safe flight
>and weight parameters for the XL that the design needs work, I am
>more optimistic than ever that we will get the changes that are
>clearly needed. So, why do you continue to tell me to go away and
>get a better plane?
>
>Paul
>XL grounded
>
>
>>--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
>>
>>Paul,
>>you will most likely not get your wish as mass balancing opens up an
>>engineering can of worms. and the stick forces will not be modified
>>as this is a little wing loaded aircraft with a wide speed
>>envelope. I suggest you either finish the plane and sell it and get
>>a heavy wing loaded aircraft like a Cessna or just sell the zoidac
>>and movw on. OPtion 3 is finish your plane, and learn to fly it
>>within its design parameters. You are issing out by not flying your
plane.
>>
>>Juan
>
>
**************Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals.
(http://personals.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntuslove00000003)
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Paul Said:
..Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
..my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
..and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes
..you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
One answer may be WHY you don't have a Medical.
Why didn't you put as much effort and research into picking the plane you were
going build as you have in trying to convince as many people as possible that
the 601XL is, in your mind, a "Death Trap?"
When I hear comments by a couple of people all that I can think of is Chicken Little
and the Boy that Cried Wolf. Your credibility is shot and the more you
say, the farther you get from kosher. Even if Zenith does find an issue, you
will find something else to complain about because it won't fall within your
alternate reality. Most of us won't forget that this all started out because
some said the issue HAS TO BE flutter. We know where that went.
While I do sympathize with our European colleagues that are legally prohibited
from flying, but I am so tired of hearing words like "DEMAND" and "GROUNDED" thrown
around when all they really are is exaggerated cries for attention.
Jon Burns
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252196#252196
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Ya,
Thanks Roger for coming over and helping me BUILD today! 1.5 more
hours in the build LOG!!
E.
1.5 h closer to FLYING !!!
Do not archive
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 7:22 PM, <JohnDRead@aol.com> wrote:
> I still think that you should all design, build and fly your own aircraft
> and get off your high horses with opinion and inuendo regarding the Zenith
> designs.
>
> John Read
> CH701 - Elbert CO - Jabiru 3300
>
> Phone: 303-648-3261
> Fax: 303-648-3262
> Cell: 719-494-4567
>
> In a message dated 7/8/2009 1:27:43 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time,
> amyvega2005@earthlink.net writes:
>
>
> Paul says- "Now that Chris has admitted through his new reductions in safe
> flight
>>and weight parameters for the XL that the design needs work, I am
>>more optimistic than ever that we will get the changes that are
>>clearly needed."
>
> Juan - dude the changes are probably negligable, mostly to apprease the few
> that for some reason fail to comprehend they are the manufacturers.
>
> Paul says- "So, why do you continue to tell me to go away and
>>get a better plane?"
>
> Juan- Paul, it is clear you are not happy, fail to understand you are the
> manufacturer and blame others for your plane not flying. I did not say to go
> get a better plane, never said that Paul, there you go again not listening/
> reading.
>
> Paul says "attack on manhood"
> Juan says" i offered to fly your plane for you are an honest offer, dont
> want it, no skin off my back, I am amazed frankly how thin your skin is.
> Funny how Sabrina said to chear up and go fly your plane and you thought" oh
> how cute, she is so smart..." Juan says the same, trying to encourage you to
> fly the plane you built, and its " O God! the quality of my Cojones are
> being questioned" . too funny.
>
> The facts as they are:
> 601 has been test to adnausium, no issues found, but to apprease the few,
> Heintz will continue to study further,
> we need to look in the mirror, and ask our selves "is my plane flyable, did
> I as the builder do a good job?"
>
> The offer to fly your plane was an honest offer, not meant to threaten your
> skills or Cojones (thats balls in Spanish),
> When I built mine, even the second 601 I helped build, it was a very
> intimidating thing to get in it and go I wold have loved the offer from
> someone.
>
> The offer to help you still stands.
>
> Juan
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>
>>Sent: Jul 8, 2009 11:04
>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
>>
>>
>>At 07:18 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>>HI Juan,
>>
>>I don't understand you. You have said about ten times now that I
>>should give up my nearly life long project to build a Zodiac. Why do
>>you keep saying that.
>>
>>First, I have ignored your opinion on my life's direction many times
>>before and will continue to do so.
>>
>>Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
>>my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
>>and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes
>>you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
>>
>>Third, your latest nonsense that I should get a better airplane and
>>not continue down the path of completion for my Zodiac seems the most
>>outrageous comment you have made to date. Why do you think I could
>>use such a plane when I have told you and the list many times that I
>>don't have a medical and can't fly anything other than LSA?
>>
>>How is it that you KNOW what will not happen with regard to the XL
>>design enhancement?
>>
>>Or perhaps, you just keep ignoring what I say just like I keep
>>ignoring what you say.
>>
>>The simple truth is that the NTSB has DEMANDED mass balance for the
>>ailerons and control system redesign. I am confident that will
>>happen at some point. Perhaps it has already been done for the LAA
>>exercise. We will learn more about those secret design changes when
>>the LAA completes its test program. I am sure it includes mass
>>balance for the ailerons and other design improvements, but I am not
>>sure what other improvements.
>>
>>Now that Chris has admitted through his new reductions in safe flight
>>and weight parameters for the XL that the design needs work, I am
>>more optimistic than ever that we will get the changes that are
>>clearly needed. So, why do you continue to tell me to go away and
>>get a better plane?
>>
>>Paul
>>XL grounded
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Paul,
>>>you will most likely not get your wish as mass balancing opens up an
>>>engineering can of worms. and the stick forces will not be modified
>>>as this is a little wing loaded aircraft with a wide speed
>>>envelope. I suggest you either finish the plane and sell it and get
>>>a heavy wing loaded aircraft like a Cessna or just sell the zoidac
>>>and movw on. OPtion 3 is finish your plane, and learn to fly it
>>>within its design parameters. You are issing out by not flying your
>>> plane.
>>>
>>>Juan
>>
>>
>>
>>
> &g========================; the ties Day
> ================================================ - MATRONICS
> WEB FORUMS ================================================ -
> List Contribution Web Site sp;
> ==================================================
>
>
> ________________________________
> Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals.
>
>
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Hey Paul Dullwits why dont you change your sign off to read SELF-IMPOSED gr
ounding i think the list should take a poll to send you to the sidelines al
l your rhetoric boils down to the point that you feel screwed and dont have
the manhood marbles to fly your finished AC im getting sick and tired of h
aving to wade through your postings. like juan i would fly your aircraft fo
r you once i deemed Your workmanship is of good quality
LarryWebber 601xl/corvair chugger
> Subject: Zenith-List: Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
> From: lsapilot@HOTMAIL.COM
> Date: Wed=2C 8 Jul 2009 16:35:34 -0700
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>
>
> Paul Said:
>
> ..Second=2C I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
> ..my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
> ..and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What=2C exactly=2C makes
> ..you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
>
>
> One answer may be WHY you don't have a Medical.
>
> Why didn't you put as much effort and research into picking the plane you
were going build as you have in trying to convince as many people as possi
ble that the 601XL is=2C in your mind=2C a "Death Trap?"
>
> When I hear comments by a couple of people all that I can think of is Chi
cken Little and the Boy that Cried Wolf. Your credibility is shot and the m
ore you say=2C the farther you get from kosher. Even if Zenith does find an
issue=2C you will find something else to complain about because it won't f
all within your alternate reality. Most of us won't forget that this all st
arted out because some said the issue HAS TO BE flutter. We know where that
went.
>
> While I do sympathize with our European colleagues that are legally prohi
bited from flying=2C but I am so tired of hearing words like "DEMAND" and "
GROUNDED" thrown around when all they really are is exaggerated cries for a
ttention.
>
>
> Jon Burns
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252196#252196
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that=92s right for you.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290
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: | New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
paul once again mass balance was not DEMANDED by ntsb but thats how your en
gineers brain read it once again RECOMMENDED is not the same as DEMANDED
LarryWebber/601xl/corvair chugger
From: psm@att.net
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
First=2C here is a link to the new letter on Zenith's web site:
http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/xl/data/c-heintz-letter-7-2009.pdf
Now for the requested comments . . .
I am glad to hear someone from the Zenith/Zenair community actually suggest
there is a need to do something about all the accidents. Reduction of gro
ss weight and airspeed limits certainly should help with the future safety
record of this design.
I am now more hopeful I will receive "Official" design changes for the XL t
hat I decided to wait for before entering flight testing. The ones I want
are aileron mass balance and control system force changes as demanded by th
e NTSB.
Paul
XL grounded
At 04:50 PM 7/7/2009=2C you wrote:
Let's hear some comments on the new Chris Heinz Letter on lowering our Vne
and Gross Weight among others! David Coberly 601XL Ready to Fly / Corvair
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live=99 SkyDrive=99: Get 25 GB of free online storage.
http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_SD_25GB_062009
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Dear Jon,
Thank you for your sophomoric psychological analysis of my motives
and goals. Of course you are wrong on every point.
I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am trying to get
Zenith to design and release changes to the Zodiac XL to meet the
statements made by the NTSB. You can argue all you want over my
choice of words, but that has always been my goal - at least since
the NTSB letter was issued.
Now to correct some of your wrong guesses.
I did indeed research the safety of the XL before embarking on my
project to build one. I checked every source I could find including
the experts at the EAA. All the information available then (indeed
all the information there was then) suggested this was a very safe
and good design.
The in-flight failures started some 2 years later. I didn't take any
action or try to convince anyone of anything for a couple of years
after the first breakup. Indeed, I didn't know what to conclude
since all the information that was available was inconsistent and
generally worthless. One of the worst days of my life was the day
the NTSB report on the first crash was released. After waiting about
a year for the full investigation we all learned that the wings came
off for unknown reasons.
Another year passed and a few more structural failures
occurred. Then the authorities in the Netherlands grounded the XLs
in that country. Instead of explaining themselves, the guy
responsible for the decision immediately went on extended
vacation. Again I said nothing.
That was followed by the Germans and British grounding the XLs in
their countries. Again I said nothing.
By this time there had been something between 5 and 10 unexplained
in-flight structure failures on XLs around the world. Of course I
was concerned about this rash of unexplained disasters. Still, I had
no facts to suggest any explanation for all these deaths. So I still
said nothing.
Finally, when I was about to get my plane inspected and start flight
testing, the NTSB came out with their (nearly?) unprecedented ruling
- that all planes in this family should be immediately grounded. I
believe this was an academic issue for most people. They were either
building along and not really too concerned about the NTSB ruling or
they had been flying their planes for a while - many for years - and
had plenty of personal confidence in their planes. For me it was a
really important event since I was facing my first flight at that
time. I had to consider what to do about the ruling with impact in
my behavior within a few days.
I made my decision and did the best I could to get resolution to the
problem. I never suggested anyone else should make the same decision
as mine and I never tried to convince anybody that there is a problem
with the XL. I merely kept the pressure up on the Heintz folks
(particularly Mathieu) by staying active on this list and continuing
to report the status of my plane - grounded. If you think that
amounts to alternate reality, then I suggest you quit making stupid
amateur psychological pronouncements on strangers and seek some real
medical advice on your own sense of reality.
Paul
XL grounded
do not archive
P.S. My medical status is none of your business.
At 04:35 PM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>Paul Said:
>
>..Second, I find your suggestions offensive. You have offered to fly
>..my plane for me - as if your manhood makes you a better pilot than me
>..and that makes it OK to fly this death trap. What, exactly, makes
>..you think my pilot skills are not up to flying the XL while yours are?
>
>
>One answer may be WHY you don't have a Medical.
>
>Why didn't you put as much effort and research into picking the
>plane you were going build as you have in trying to convince as many
>people as possible that the 601XL is, in your mind, a "Death Trap?"
>
>When I hear comments by a couple of people all that I can think of
>is Chicken Little and the Boy that Cried Wolf. Your credibility is
>shot and the more you say, the farther you get from kosher. Even if
>Zenith does find an issue, you will find something else to complain
>about because it won't fall within your alternate reality. Most of
>us won't forget that this all started out because some said the
>issue HAS TO BE flutter. We know where that went.
>
>While I do sympathize with our European colleagues that are legally
>prohibited from flying, but I am so tired of hearing words like
>"DEMAND" and "GROUNDED" thrown around when all they really are is
>exaggerated cries for attention.
>
>
>Jon Burns
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Jim Belcher wrote:
>
>
>
> I looked hard at the HDS, but (in part) rejected it because of the limited
> fuel. It's a personal choice: I tend to do a lot of cross countries. I climb
> high, reduce the power, trim out, and stay there for 4 1/2 to 5 hours.
>
>
>
My wing tanks hold 21 gal, 20 gal usable fuel (5 hours). I could have
added two 7.5 gal wing locker tanks (3 hours and 45 min.) and an 8 gal
(2 hour) fuselage tank for 10 hrs 45 min fuel. That is 44 gal of fuel
or 264 lbs. 674 lbs empty airplane, plus 264 lbs fuel, plus 165 lbs
(me), plus 99 lb baggage equals 1200 lbs GTW. 3 or 4 potty stops before
I would have to add fuel. OR carry a portable human factors relief
device and fly 10 hours and get darn hungry.
Leo Gates
N601Z
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
I'm sure glad I haven't been reading all of this mess. I got caught up in there
for awhile, but I've since made the conscious decision to STOP reading as much
on this website. I'm now spending all my free time BUILDING in stead of worrying
about something that might not ever happen. I realized too I have NO CONTROL
what the NTSB and FAA are up to. If they put out a mandatory AD, I will
adhere to it and do whatever it says I need to do. If and when I get to the
point of the starting the flying part in first stage, I will cross that bridge
when I get there. I'm contemplating installing a BRS, but nothing is cast
in stone there yet either. I'm takiing a "wait and see" attitude on this one.
Of course, all of this is MY CHOICE and no one has coerced me into anything.
Each and everyone one of you are making your choices. Each of you are right
in your own way and NEITHER should be trying to convince the other they are
right. There is no solid "right" OR "wrong" here. It is was it is. A choice.
Paul has made his choice. Juan has made his. Now if I may make a suggestion:
put your testosterone back up on the shelf and DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE instead
of picking, picking, and bickering!!
Enough said here. Its time for me to step off my soapbox and let you "gentlemen"
to ponder what I said. As for me, my air compressor is ready and I am OUTTA
HERE!
Tailwinds,
Larry Hursh
PS - don't bother responding back to me - I'm too busy building. :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252225#252225
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Paul,
Ref page 11 of the NTSB report
"------ the National Transportation Safety Board recommends that the
Federal Aviation Aviation Administration:
Prohibit further flight on 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" (underling and
bold mine)
The above in my opinion as a retired aerospace engineer, and my Phase I
flight tests, and the Zenith Flight tests and the results of the Modal
surveys (Ground Vibration Tests - GVT) is that the recommendation by the
NTSB to determine that the XL has adequate protection from flutter has
been, in my lowly opinion, satisfied. Of course this assumes that the
aileron control cables are not slack, for the reported real flutter was
a result of slack cables - the flutter stopped once the IAS was lowered
and did not repeat with proper cable tension, which per the GVT tests
should be at a minimum of 10 pounds - much less than the Zenith spec
value.
The XL does though, like most all light aircraft, have a wing removal
device called a "stick". I personally like the light stick forces of
the XL, but as Mr. Henitz in his letter stated "Remember that, as with
any light aircraft, if you encounter unexpected turbulence while
cruising, ride it out rather than fight it - and slow down!"
Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Mulwitz
To: zenith-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: New Chris Heinz Letter Today
Hi Tony,
First, let me say I have no knowledge of ZBAG letters or any other
activities of that group. I am not a member and really don't care what
they say or do.
As to the language of the NTSB, I will yield to your interpretation of
the exact points. My take is that they DEMANDED that the entire fleet
of XLs be grounded until the safety issues are resolved. If I have
overemphasized the aileron mass balance or control gradient change, then
I apologize.
Still, the decision I made is to ground my plane until those specific
changes have been made and approved by appropriate engineers and
organizations (e.g. Zenith). You might think the German tests negate
the need for aileron mass balance, but I don't. That is because all the
experts I have spoken to on this subject say the balance is needed
whether aileron flutter can be proved to be a problem or not. This
includes a number of high ranking FAA safety folks and also a number of
highly experienced kitplane folks. For me to drop the need for aileron
mass balance would take at least the NTSB saying it isn't needed -
something I doubt I will ever see.
I realize I am being very conservative on my decision point and that
other people can and should make their own decisions. However, I wonder
if all the people who are continuing to fly their XLs had another
airplane in their hangar they would still choose to fly the XL. Besides
being a safety decision it winds up being a financial decision too.
Paul
XL Grounded
At 08:56 AM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
Page 11 of the NTSB report has the "Recommendations" not "Demands"
that:
a Ground Vibration Test be conducted and "consideration" of
mass-balanced ailerons,
and an "evaluation" the stick force gradient at max aft CG and
notification to the pilots of the stick-force gradient that occurs at
the aft cg, especially at higher G forces.
Since most of us, or possibly none of us, have ever had access to or
have read the forwarding letter of ZBAG to the NTSB, is it possible that
ZBAG letter had the "Demands"???
Tony Graziano
XL/Jab; N493TG; 509 hrs
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: New Chris Heinz Letter Today |
Hi Tony,
First let me say your qualifications to understand the technical
details of this issue are a lot better than mine. I believe you are
convinced that flutter is not an issue for the XL based on the German
test report.
However, you are not the FAA. I don't believe they will determine
that the XL has adequate protection from flutter no matter what any
engineering reports say. I learned when I discussed this issue with
them at Sun n Fun that they already believe the XL needs balanced
ailerons and that nothing will change their minds on that
point. Indeed, I believe the NTSB has the same opinion (but I have
no personal proof of that position).
By talking to lots of FAA and industry folks who have been around for
a long time I learned there is a belief that balanced ailerons are
needed by all planes of this sort. History has shown that to be true
in many different designs, and these guys are convinced that the XL
is no exception to this rule.
The other news from those discussions is that the FAA will not take
any action to prevent E-AB owners from flying their planes. They
just don't care about experimental planes in that sort of way. They
do care about factory built planes, but even those are safe from FAA
rule making for at least a year. It takes them that long (and
longer) to issue an NPRM and get to the final rule. That is the
process they will use to issue a mandatory AD if they choose to go in
that direction.
It is my hope that the whole problem will go away without actual
rules from the FAA. All it takes is a group of design changes from
Zenith/Zenair with some sort of mandatory implementation from AMD for
S-LSA XLs. Then the FAA won't need to take any regulatory action.
For E-AB it is all up to the owner to decide what to do with their plane.
Paul
XL grounded
At 09:59 PM 7/8/2009, you wrote:
>"------ the National Transportation Safety Board recommends that the
>Federal Aviation Aviation Administration:
>
> Prohibit further flight on 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" (underling
> and bold mine)
>
>The above in my opinion as a retired aerospace engineer, and my
>Phase I flight tests, and the Zenith Flight tests and the results of
>the Modal surveys (Ground Vibration Tests - GVT) is that the
>recommendation by the NTSB to determine that the XL has adequate
>protection from flutter has been, in my lowly opinion,
>satisfied. Of course this assumes that the aileron control cables
>are not slack, for the reported real flutter was a result of slack
>cables - the flutter stopped once the IAS was lowered and did not
>repeat with proper cable tension, which per the GVT tests should be
>at a minimum of 10 pounds - much less than the Zenith spec value.
>
>The XL does though, like most all light aircraft, have a wing
>removal device called a "stick". I personally like the light stick
>forces of the XL, but as Mr. Henitz in his letter stated "Remember
>that, as with any light aircraft, if you encounter unexpected
>turbulence while cruising, ride it out rather than fight it - and slow down!"
>
>Tony
>
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! --
|