Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:16 AM - Chat Room (George Race)
2. 09:03 AM - Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Terry Phillips)
3. 09:48 AM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published ()
4. 11:52 AM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (japhillipsga@aol.com)
5. 01:10 PM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Paul Mulwitz)
6. 03:58 PM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
7. 05:40 PM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Lawrence Webber)
8. 06:12 PM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Ron Lendon)
9. 06:23 PM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Paul Mulwitz)
10. 06:44 PM - Re: Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Paul Mulwitz)
11. 06:48 PM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Sabrina)
12. 07:33 PM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Ron Lendon)
13. 07:42 PM - Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Ron Lendon)
14. 07:47 PM - Re: Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (Paul Mulwitz)
15. 08:19 PM - Re: Re: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published (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 |
|
Live Chat Room every Monday evening around 8:00 EDT
http://www.mykitairplane.com <blocked::http://www.mykitairplane.com/>
Click on the Chat Room link at the top of the page.
George
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: | Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
The IVW have published their final report on the Markermeer accident;
follow the link on:
http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/inflight-break-up-2008107/#rapporten
In my opinion it is an excellent report.
I have also posted the IVW report, as well as, additional information to
the ZBAG Yahoo Group file section in the Markermeer Folder.
Terry
--
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail& flaps are done;
Upgrading wings& ailerons per AMD Safety Directive
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
This is an investigation? I've seen better investigations into a
purse-snatching ring. Where are the descriptions of the extent, type,
and direction of damage? Any indications of sequential failure? Any
torsional, compressive, or tensional irregularities? Metallurgical
analyses? Popped rivets? Sheared bolts? Torn bolt holes? Rear
carry-through compression? It took them three years to complete a report
that could have been accurately summarized in one sentence----"It done
broke." Disappointing at best.
Paul R
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry Phillips<mailto:ttp44@rkymtn.net>
To: Zenith-List: Matronics<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 10:59 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been
published
<ttp44@rkymtn.net<mailto:ttp44@rkymtn.net>>
The IVW have published their final report on the Markermeer accident;
follow the link on:
http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/inflight-break-up-2
008107/#rapporten<http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/i
nflight-break-up-2008107/#rapporten>
In my opinion it is an excellent report.
I have also posted the IVW report, as well as, additional information
to
the ZBAG Yahoo Group file section in the Markermeer Folder.
Terry
--
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail& flaps are
done;
Upgrading wings& ailerons per AMD Safety Directive
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/<http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Zenith-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
I read the Dutch report and found it sufficiently informative. I may be the
only builder and flyer that sees that the report says the ZAC host modific
ations and upgrades though painful to perform are the solution. Maybe not,
maybe so??? Not knowing much about metallurgy, force torsion and compressio
n issues I have to rely on folks educated differently than I. I suppose tho
se dull Dutch experts may have really screwed up by publishing this report
and failing to ask our expert, Mr. Paul R., to approve their investigation
and findings. I know I'd feel more secure if they had got some more opinion
s from such experts as I fly my XL-B around the sky's of Georgia. Seems lik
e about half of the 24 page report spoke to the issue of weak wing strength
, weak rear spar attachment material, unbalanced ailerons and the propensit
y for loose control cables in flexible wings to get even more slack and nur
ture flutter conditions. I think the Dutch folks make it fairly clear that
flutter took the wing off or did I miss something? I made the ZAC modificat
ions and several others to my XL-B last year and fly her now. She flys well
and stronge, but she always did. I also have a RV-8a I built and I think t
he XL-B wing spar I assembled is about as strong, maybe stronger. Course, I
don't suppose the value of my plane will ever rise much above salvage valu
e for possible sale and we all have our ZBAG Busy Body folks to thank for t
he many thousands of dollars of cost to each of us. Wonder if this whole bu
siness could have been handled a different way? Lots of plane crash. Why w
as the XL and ZAC singled out for this treatment? This is my last thought I
'm going to waste on the subject, fly happy and often, Bill Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: paulrod36 <paulrod36@msn.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 11, 2011 12:48 pm
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been
published
This is an investigation? I've seen better investigations into a purse-snat
ching ring. Where are the descriptions of the extent, type, and direction o
f damage? Any indications of sequential failure? Any torsional, compressiv
e, or tensional irregularities? Metallurgical analyses? Popped rivets? Shea
red bolts? Torn bolt holes? Rear carry-through compression? It took them th
ree years to complete a report that could have been accurately summarized
in one sentence----"It done broke." Disappointing at best.
Paul R
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry Phillips
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 10:59 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been publ
ished
The IVW have published their final report on the Markermeer accident;
follow the link on:
http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/inflight-break-up-200
8107/#rapporten
In my opinion it is an excellent report.
I have also posted the IVW report, as well as, additional information to
the ZBAG Yahoo Group file section in the Markermeer Folder.
Terry
--
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail& flaps are done;
Upgrading wings& ailerons per AMD Safety Directive
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/http://www.matronnbsp; via the Web title
=http://forums.matronics.com/ href="http://forums.matronics.com"http://
forums.matronics.com
_p; generous bsp; title=http://www.matronics.c
om/contribution href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://www.ma
tronics.com/c================
-= - The Zenith-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= -- http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
-
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= -- http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= -- http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
Hi Bill,
I agree with everything you said - I think. I admit I didn't really
understand all the technical details of the Dutch report, but I think it
points to flutter and weak wings as the cause of their particular accident.
They also added a lot of details to the whole story that I hadn't heard
before. One interesting point was the French in-flight failure that
didn't result in a fatality because of a ballistic 'chute. The pilot of
that incident reported flutter before the wing failed. Another
interesting point (to me) was the report that the solid rivets holding
the wing spars together failed in the shear direction. I can't imagine
how this could happen in a properly designed wing. That could be just
my shortcoming.
I think they clearly said they "Think" flutter caused the start of the
incident in the Netherlands. The FAA managers I have spoken to told me
they had evidence of flutter in the accidents they investigated but they
couldn't determine if the flutter caused the structure failure or the
structure failure caused the flutter. They also told me in no uncertain
terms that before the upgrade the aircraft did not meet the appropriate
design standards and after the upgrade it does.
For me the bottom line is we should all install the upgrade package in
our planes. This is what the FAA demands, the folks at ZAC tell us to
do and now the Dutch seem to agree with. The Dutch report singles out
aileron balance and reinforcing RR-7 as key elements, but I think they
also said the spar structure needs help too.
Paul
Nearly finished installing upgrade.
On 4/11/2011 11:49 AM, japhillipsga@aol.com wrote:
> I read the Dutch report and found it sufficiently informative. I may
> be the only builder and flyer that sees that the report says the ZAC
> host modifications and upgrades though painful to perform are the
> solution. Maybe not, maybe so??? Not knowing much about metallurgy,
> force torsion and compression issues I have to rely on folks educated
> differently than I. I suppose those dull Dutch experts may have really
> screwed up by publishing this report and failing to ask our expert,
> Mr. Paul R., to approve their investigation and findings. I know I'd
> feel more secure if they had got some more opinions from such experts
> as I fly my XL-B around the sky's of Georgia. Seems like about half of
> the 24 page report spoke to the issue of weak wing strength, weak rear
> spar attachment material, unbalanced ailerons and the propensity for
> loose control cables in flexible wings to get even more slack and
> nurture flutter conditions. I think the Dutch folks make it fairly
> clear that flutter took the wing off or did I miss something? I made
> the ZAC modifications and several others to my XL-B last year and fly
> her now. She flys well and stronge, but she always did. I also have a
> RV-8a I built and I think the XL-B wing spar I assembled is about as
> strong, maybe stronger. Course, I don't suppose the value of my plane
> will ever rise much above salvage value for possible sale and we all
> have our ZBAG Busy Body folks to thank for the many thousands of
> dollars of cost to each of us. Wonder if this whole business could
> have been handled a different way? Lots of plane crash. Why was the
> XL and ZAC singled out for this treatment? This is my last thought I'm
> going to waste on the subject, fly happy and often, Bill Phillips
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: paulrod36 <paulrod36@msn.com>
> To: zenith-list <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Mon, Apr 11, 2011 12:48 pm
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has
> been published
>
> This is an investigation? I've seen better investigations into a
> purse-snatching ring. Where are the descriptions of the extent, type,
> and direction of damage? Any indications of sequential failure? Any
> torsional, compressive, or tensional irregularities? Metallurgical
> analyses? Popped rivets? Sheared bolts? Torn bolt holes? Rear
> carry-through compression? It took them three years to complete a
> report that could have been accurately summarized in one
> sentence----"It done broke." Disappointing at best.
> Paul R
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Terry Phillips <mailto:ttp44@rkymtn.net>
> *To:* Zenith-List: Matronics <mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, April 11, 2011 10:59 AM
> *Subject:* Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident
> has been published
>
> <ttp44@rkymtn.net <mailto:ttp44@rkymtn.net>>
>
> The IVW have published their final report on the Markermeer accident;
> follow the link on:
>
> http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/inflight-break-up-2008107/#rapporten
>
>
> In my opinion it is an excellent report.
>
> I have also posted the IVW report, as well as, additional
> information to
> the ZBAG Yahoo Group file section in the Markermeer Folder.
>
> Terry
>
> --
> Terry Phillips
> ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
> Corvallis MT
> ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail& flaps
> are done;
> Upgrading wings& ailerons per AMD Safety Directive
> http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/http://www.matronnbsp; via the
> Web title=http://forums.matronics.com/
> href="http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List>
> _p; generous bsp;
> title=http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://www.matronics.com/c================
>
>
> *
>
> t=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
> forums.matronics.com
> k>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> *
> *
>
>
> *
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
What I thought was interesting was the fact I could see no upright attached
to the wing attach bolt or did I just miss it?
It also looks like the solid rivets were the smaller 1/8 rivets that I have
seen in a few older kit #'s.
>From day one I have said it was Flutter and still stand by that. Every 601
that has been opened up including 10 by me and we have seen nothing to
point to stress anywhere so Flutter it was in my book.
Jeff
In a message dated 4/11/2011 12:48:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
paulrod36@msn.com writes:
This is an investigation? I've seen better investigations into a
purse-snatching ring. Where are the descriptions of the extent, type, and direction
of damage? Any indications of sequential failure? Any torsional,
compressive, or tensional irregularities? Metallurgical analyses? Popped rivets?
Sheared bolts? Torn bolt holes? Rear carry-through compression? It took them
three years to complete a report that could have been accurately summarized
in one sentence----"It done broke." Disappointing at best.
Paul R
----- Original Message -----
From: _Terry Phillips_ (mailto:ttp44@rkymtn.net)
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 10:59 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been
published
(mailto:ttp44@rkymtn.net) >
The IVW have published their final report on the Markermeer accident;
follow the link on:
_http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/inflight-break-up-200
8107/#rapporten_
(http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/inflight-break-up-2008107/#rapporten)
In my opinion it is an excellent report.
I have also posted the IVW report, as well as, additional information to
the ZBAG Yahoo Group file section in the Markermeer Folder.
Terry
--
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail& flaps are done;
Upgrading wings& ailerons per AMD Safety Directive
_http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/http://www.matronnbsp; via the Web
title=http://forums.matronics.com/
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com_ (http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/)
_p; generous bsp;
title=http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c================
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
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: | Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
HERE WE F%&%g GO AGAIN !!!!
Larry
From: psm@att.net
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been
published
Hi Bill=2C
I agree with everything you said - I think. I admit I didn't really unders
tand all the technical details of the Dutch report=2C but I think it points
to flutter and weak wings as the cause of their particular accident.
They also added a lot of details to the whole story that I hadn't heard bef
ore. One interesting point was the French in-flight failure that didn't re
sult in a fatality because of a ballistic 'chute. The pilot of that incide
nt reported flutter before the wing failed. Another interesting point (to
me) was the report that the solid rivets holding the wing spars together fa
iled in the shear direction. I can't imagine how this could happen in a pr
operly designed wing. That could be just my shortcoming.
I think they clearly said they "Think" flutter caused the start of the inci
dent in the Netherlands. The FAA managers I have spoken to told me they ha
d evidence of flutter in the accidents they investigated but they couldn't
determine if the flutter caused the structure failure or the structure fail
ure caused the flutter. They also told me in no uncertain terms that befor
e the upgrade the aircraft did not meet the appropriate design standards an
d after the upgrade it does.
For me the bottom line is we should all install the upgrade package in our
planes. This is what the FAA demands=2C the folks at ZAC tell us to do and
now the Dutch seem to agree with. The Dutch report singles out aileron ba
lance and reinforcing RR-7 as key elements=2C but I think they also said th
e spar structure needs help too.
Paul
Nearly finished installing upgrade.
On 4/11/2011 11:49 AM=2C japhillipsga@aol.com wrote:
I read the Dutch report and found it sufficiently informative. I may be the
only builder and flyer that sees that the report says the ZAC host modific
ations and upgrades though painful to perform are the solution. Maybe not
=2C maybe so??? Not knowing much about metallurgy=2C force torsion and comp
ression issues I have to rely on folks educated differently than I. I suppo
se those dull Dutch experts may have really screwed up by publishing this r
eport and failing to ask our expert=2C Mr. Paul R.=2C to approve their inve
stigation and findings. I know I'd feel more secure if they had got some mo
re opinions from such experts as I fly my XL-B around the sky's of Georgia.
Seems like about half of the 24 page report spoke to the issue of weak win
g strength=2C weak rear spar attachment material=2C unbalanced ailerons and
the propensity for loose control cables in flexible wings to get even more
slack and nurture flutter conditions. I think the Dutch folks make it fair
ly clear that flutter took the wing off or did I miss something? I made the
ZAC modifications and several others to my XL-B last year and fly her now.
She flys well and stronge=2C but she always did. I also have a RV-8a I bui
lt and I think the XL-B wing spar I assembled is about as strong=2C maybe s
tronger. Course=2C I don't suppose the value of my plane will ever rise muc
h above salvage value for possible sale and we all have our ZBAG Busy Body
folks to thank for the many thousands of dollars of cost to each of us. Won
der if this whole business could have been handled a different way? Lots o
f plane crash. Why was the XL and ZAC singled out for this treatment? This
is my last thought I'm going to waste on the subject=2C fly happy and often
=2C Bill Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: paulrod36 <paulrod36@msn.com>
Sent: Mon=2C Apr 11=2C 2011 12:48 pm
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been
published
This is an investigation? I've seen better investigations into a purse-snat
ching ring. Where are the descriptions of the extent=2C type=2C and directi
on of damage? Any indications of sequential failure? Any torsional=2C comp
ressive=2C or tensional irregularities? Metallurgical analyses? Popped rive
ts? Sheared bolts? Torn bolt holes? Rear carry-through compression? It took
them three years to complete a report that could have been accurately summ
arized in one sentence----"It done broke." Disappointing at best.
Paul R
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry Phillips
Sent: Monday=2C April 11=2C 2011 10:59 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been publ
ished
The IVW have published their final report on the Markermeer accident=3B
follow the link on:
http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/inflight-break-up-200
8107/#rapporten
In my opinion it is an excellent report.
I have also posted the IVW report=2C as well as=2C additional information t
o
the ZBAG Yahoo Group file section in the Markermeer Folder.
Terry
--
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail& flaps are done
=3B
Upgrading wings& ailerons per AMD Safety Directive
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/http://www.matronnbsp=3B via the Web title
=http://forums.matronics.com/ href="http://forums.matronics.com"http://
forums.matronics.com
_p=3B generous bsp=3B title=http://www.matroni
cs.com/contribution href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://ww
w.matronics.com/c================
t=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
forums.matronics.com
k>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
That's all well and good but I must point out, the Airplane in question was built
to different standards (lighter material) than the LSA versions. Therefore
postulating on these results is only academic opinion.
Installing the upgrade is your choice here in the USA if your airplane is already
flying. If you don't have the airworthiness certificate, you must, or you probably
won't get one.
These discussions can be misleading when apples and oranges are being compared.
On a brighter note, making progress toward having a flyable XLB.
--------
Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI
WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Corvair Engine Prints:
http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336677#336677
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
Hi Larry,
If you have a problem with my post, perhaps you can find a more erudite
way to express it.
So, what exactly is your problem?
Paul
On 4/11/2011 5:37 PM, Lawrence Webber wrote:
> HERE WE F%&%g GO AGAIN !!!!
>
> Larry
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:07:01 -0700
> From: psm@att.net
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has
> been published
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> I agree with everything you said - I think. I admit I didn't really
> understand all the technical details of the Dutch report, but I think
> it points to flutter and weak wings as the cause of their particular
> accident.
>
> They also added a lot of details to the whole story that I hadn't
> heard before. One interesting point was the French in-flight failure
> that didn't result in a fatality because of a ballistic 'chute. The
> pilot of that incident reported flutter before the wing failed.
> Another interesting point (to me) was the report that the solid rivets
> holding the wing spars together failed in the shear direction. I
> can't imagine how this could happen in a properly designed wing. That
> could be just my shortcoming.
>
> I think they clearly said they "Think" flutter caused the start of the
> incident in the Netherlands. The FAA managers I have spoken to told
> me they had evidence of flutter in the accidents they investigated but
> they couldn't determine if the flutter caused the structure failure or
> the structure failure caused the flutter. They also told me in no
> uncertain terms that before the upgrade the aircraft did not meet the
> appropriate design standards and after the upgrade it does.
>
> For me the bottom line is we should all install the upgrade package in
> our planes. This is what the FAA demands, the folks at ZAC tell us to
> do and now the Dutch seem to agree with. The Dutch report singles out
> aileron balance and reinforcing RR-7 as key elements, but I think they
> also said the spar structure needs help too.
>
> Paul
> Nearly finished installing upgrade.
>
>
> On 4/11/2011 11:49 AM, japhillipsga@aol.com
> <mailto:japhillipsga@aol.com> wrote:
>
> I read the Dutch report and found it sufficiently informative. I
> may be the only builder and flyer that sees that the report says
> the ZAC host modifications and upgrades though painful to
> perform are the solution. Maybe not, maybe so??? Not knowing much
> about metallurgy, force torsion and compression issues I have to
> rely on folks educated differently than I. I suppose those dull
> Dutch experts may have really screwed up by publishing this report
> and failing to ask our expert, Mr. Paul R., to approve their
> investigation and findings. I know I'd feel more secure if they
> had got some more opinions from such experts as I fly my XL-B
> around the sky's of Georgia. Seems like about half of the 24 page
> report spoke to the issue of weak wing strength, weak rear spar
> attachment material, unbalanced ailerons and the propensity for
> loose control cables in flexible wings to get even more slack and
> nurture flutter conditions. I think the Dutch folks make it fairly
> clear that flutter took the wing off or did I miss something? I
> made the ZAC modifications and several others to my XL-B last year
> and fly her now. She flys well and stronge, but she always did. I
> also have a RV-8a I built and I think the XL-B wing spar I
> assembled is about as strong, maybe stronger. Course, I don't
> suppose the value of my plane will ever rise much above salvage
> value for possible sale and we all have our ZBAG Busy Body folks
> to thank for the many thousands of dollars of cost to each of us.
> Wonder if this whole business could have been handled a different
> way? Lots of plane crash. Why was the XL and ZAC singled out for
> this treatment? This is my last thought I'm going to waste on the
> subject, fly happy and often, Bill Phillips
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: paulrod36 <paulrod36@msn.com> <mailto:paulrod36@msn.com>
> To: zenith-list <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> <mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Mon, Apr 11, 2011 12:48 pm
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer accident
> has been published
>
> This is an investigation? I've seen better investigations into a
> purse-snatching ring. Where are the descriptions of the extent,
> type, and direction of damage? Any indications of sequential
> failure? Any torsional, compressive, or tensional irregularities?
> Metallurgical analyses? Popped rivets? Sheared bolts? Torn bolt
> holes? Rear carry-through compression? It took them three years to
> complete a report that could have been accurately summarized in
> one sentence----"It done broke." Disappointing at best.
> Paul R
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Terry Phillips <mailto:ttp44@rkymtn.net>
> *To:* Zenith-List: Matronics <mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, April 11, 2011 10:59 AM
> *Subject:* Zenith-List: Final Report on the Markermeer
> accident has been published
>
> <ttp44@rkymtn.net <mailto:ttp44@rkymtn.net>>
>
> The IVW have published their final report on the Markermeer
> accident;
> follow the link on:
>
> http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/index.php/onderzoeken/inflight-break-up-2008107/#rapporten
>
>
> In my opinion it is an excellent report.
>
> I have also posted the IVW report, as well as, additional
> information to
> the ZBAG Yahoo Group file section in the Markermeer Folder.
>
> Terry
>
> --
> Terry Phillips
> ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
> Corvallis MT
> ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail&
> flaps are done;
> Upgrading wings& ailerons per AMD Safety Directive
> http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/http://www.matronnbsp; via
> the Web title=http://forums.matronics.com/
> href="http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List>
> _p; generous bsp;
> title=http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://www.matronics.com/c================
>
>
> *
>
> t=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
> forums.matronics.com
> k>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> =_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> *
> *
>
>
> *
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been |
published
Hi Ron,
I don't understand your comment that installing the upgrade is your
choice here.
The way I read the SAIB published by the FAA in November 2009 was if any
pilot is caught flying a Zodiac XL without the upgrade installed they
will have their license revoked. The way they worded it was they have
determined that the Zodiac XL without the upgrade installed is not
airworthy and any pilot who flies a non-airworthy plane will lose their
pilot's license. This is what I called the "Nuclear Option" at the time.
Did I misunderstand something?
Paul
On 4/11/2011 6:10 PM, Ron Lendon wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Ron Lendon"<ron.lendon@gmail.com>
>
> That's all well and good but I must point out, the Airplane in question was built
to different standards (lighter material) than the LSA versions. Therefore
postulating on these results is only academic opinion.
>
> Installing the upgrade is your choice here in the USA if your airplane is already
flying. If you don't have the airworthiness certificate, you must, or you
probably won't get one.
>
> These discussions can be misleading when apples and oranges are being compared.
>
> On a brighter note, making progress toward having a flyable XLB.
>
> --------
> Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI
> WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
> Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
> http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
> Corvair Engine Prints:
> http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336677#336677
>
>
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
Hey guys... on a lighter note, I am putting together a Ken Burns type video short
on Zenith for my Anthropology class at MIT. I would really appreciate it if
you could each send me ONE picture of you next to/working on your project during
the build--your favorite build photo, at any point during the construction!
(Not a link, just your one favorite photo.) chicago2paris@msn.com
It is light hearted at this point, aimed at celebrating our builds as opposed to
a search for a smoking gun.
Things are going great at MIT this semester as well, even better than last, so
far. I will fly into Chicago to film some video clips on Monday the 18th. I
think the EAA will be there as well to take some photos for their Sport Aviation
magazine if the snow predicted for the upcoming weekend does not shift into
early next week.
As I told a couple of you off list, I am toying with the idea of trying to become
the first MIT Aero/Astro student to skip out of Unified Engineering. It
is a four class, two semester sophomore course load that covers basic aerodynamics,
thermodynamics, signal processing and structures.
I would really appreciate those photos--remember just one, hopefully with a big
smile! 600/700/800 series, it does not matter.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336682#336682
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
The way I understand it, it is the pilots option. It is a strong recommendation
but not enforceable unless that particular airplane and pilot come under scrutiny
of the FAA for some other reason. So yes the threat is implied but it is
still your free choice as I understand it. I am not a lawyer but I do know a
few people who have exercised their freedom to choose in regards to this issue.
--------
Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI
WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Corvair Engine Prints:
http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336686#336686
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been published |
Paul,
This is right from the FAA site:
> Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins (SAIB)
>
> A Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) is an information tool that
alerts, educates, and makes recommendations to the aviation community. SAIBs
contain non-regulatory information and guidance that does not meet the criteria
for an Airworthiness Directive (AD).
Key words here are non-regulatory.
FYI
--------
Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI
WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Corvair Engine Prints:
http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336687#336687
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been |
published
Hi Ron,
I believe your analysis is exactly correct, but I think your "Strong
recommendation" comment falls short of the mark.
I know from my conversations with the actual players at FAA that they
believe the original (?) XL design falls short of the ASTM standard
regarding structural strength and the upgraded design meets the
standard. All parties to this problem agree that all owners should
install the upgrade. That includes the FAA, NTSB, Zenith/Zenair, and to
a certain extent several foreign government civil aviation authorities.
I know there are holdouts among Zodiac XL owners, but for the life of me
I can't understand why. All of the facts and authorities point to the
simple fact that the upgrade is necessary to make these planes safe. It
is a big job to install the upgrade, and some people feel they can
install an alternate design upgrade. Those that think the original
design was OK are simply in denial of reality.
Paul
On 4/11/2011 7:31 PM, Ron Lendon wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Ron Lendon"<ron.lendon@gmail.com>
>
> The way I understand it, it is the pilots option. It is a strong recommendation
but not enforceable unless that particular airplane and pilot come under scrutiny
of the FAA for some other reason. So yes the threat is implied but it
is still your free choice as I understand it. I am not a lawyer but I do know
a few people who have exercised their freedom to choose in regards to this issue.
>
> --------
> Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI
> WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
> Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
> http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
> Corvair Engine Prints:
> http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336686#336686
>
>
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: Final Report on the Markermeer accident has been |
published
Hi Ron,
The other side of that argument - "does not meet the criteria for an
Airworthiness Directive (AD)" would apply to all experimental and LSA
aircraft. Only type certificated aircraft can be the object of an AD.
From the bureaucratic point of view, the whole Zodiac XL issue falls
into the cracks. If it were just a kit plane the FAA would have
probably ignored the whole thing. The fact that people could buy
factory built S-LSA versions led them to the point that they had to do
something but the existing regulatory environment didn't really allow
them to do much. You see, it is the manufacturer that controls LSAs not
the FAA. When they issued the SAIB they said, in effect, that AMD and
the FAA required people to install the change. Since the kit version of
the Zodiac is exactly the same as the S-LSA (if you don't count the
difference between a factory built plane and one built buy the person
who intends to fly it) the decisions made for the AMD version had to
also apply to the kit plane, E-AB, version. This just didn't work when
you put all the rules and lack of rules together. It was the first big
test of the new LSA rules and a very sticky one from the FAA's
perspective. That, in my opinion, is why they used the "Nuclear Option"
of declaring the XL un-airworthy and threatening to ground any pilot
caught flying it.
If only the documents released by the FAA were easier to interpret we
would all have the same understanding of the actual facts in this whole
mess. Alas, what we got was government speak and a need for advanced
degrees in aeronautical engineering to get the actual message.
I know some people are holding on to their faith in Chris Heintz when he
said there is nothing wrong with the XL design and continuing to fly the
plane that the FAA has found un-airworthy. I wish it were something
that could be easily fixed (that is to get them to install the upgrade)
but apparently it will take more deaths to get the real message across.
Paul
On 4/11/2011 7:40 PM, Ron Lendon wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Ron Lendon"<ron.lendon@gmail.com>
>
> Paul,
>
> This is right from the FAA site:
>
>
>> Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins (SAIB)
>>
>> A Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) is an information tool that
alerts, educates, and makes recommendations to the aviation community. SAIBs
contain non-regulatory information and guidance that does not meet the criteria
for an Airworthiness Directive (AD).
>
> Key words here are non-regulatory.
>
> FYI
>
> --------
> Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI
> WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
> Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
> http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
> Corvair Engine Prints:
> http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336687#336687
>
>
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! --
|