Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:27 AM - Re: Re: Rear Spar attachment (jaybannist@cs.com)
2. 07:25 AM - Re: Re: Rear Spar attachment (A.F.RUPP@att.net)
3. 07:27 AM - Re: Re: Recently completed Fuel Gauge Question (Jim Belcher)
4. 01:55 PM - Re: Rear Spar attachment (PatrickW)
5. 05:25 PM - LSA OR EXPERIMENTAL (GLJSOJ1)
6. 10:09 PM - Re: Re: Rear Spar attachment (Gary Gower)
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: Rear Spar attachment |
Tim,
Again, I meant no disrespect.
At the time I was working on it, I wondered: Since there are actually
two doublers (an angle and a plate) on the rear wing spar, why were
there not doublers on the channel in the fuselage ? It seems to me that
reinforcing that channel would be necessary to get any benefit from
thickening the connector. Beyond that, the wing rear spar is stabilized
in buckling by being riveted to the wing skins. The fuselage channel
only has the bottom flange stabilized by riveting to the fuselage floor
and the .025" upright channels.
The point is that this is a very complex connection; and one that
shouldn't be messed with, without a LOT of engineering analysis. I am
assuming that the change in the angle of incidence of the 650 wing was
the reason for the change to the connector plate; therefore, it really
doesn't apply to the XL.
Jay in Dallas
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Juhl <juhl@avci.net>
Sent: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 8:55 pm
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: Rear Spar attachment
Jay,
If it was confirmed that the bracket had been beefed up then my next
question
would have been to ask what had been done to the attaching structure.
I'm not trying to add to the hysteria about the wing safety, but I have
always
considered the rear attachment to be a potential weak point. Since I
will be
working on that section soon I thought it would be good to investigate
whether
or not major changes had been made in that area that were adaptable to
my XL.
I've been away from building since early June so I am not as up to date
on
current events as I would like to be. Since I plan to get back to
building soon
I'm just trying to get up to speed.
Tim
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Working on fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 4326#204326
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
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: Rear Spar attachment |
Tim,
According to ZAC in the Summary of Changes in the Builders Update section of the
Zenith website the forward and rear uprights geometry was changed to accomodate
the angle of incidence change and thus the attach plate was changed. As Jay
pointed out there were a series of changes in that area to accomodate the canopy
and wing incidence changes. The drawings for the canopy latches are available
as is a list of the changes from the 601XL to 650 on Zeniths Builders Update
website.
Al
601 XL
-------------- Original message from jaybannist@cs.com: --------------
> Tim ......
> The point is that this is a very complex connection; and one that
> shouldn't be messed with, without a LOT of engineering analysis. I am
> assuming that the change in the angle of incidence of the 650 wing was
> the reason for the change to the connector plate; therefore, it really
> doesn't apply to the XL.
>
> Jay in Dallas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Juhl
> To: zenith601-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 8:55 pm
> Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: Rear Spar attachment
>
>
> Jay,
> If it was confirmed that the bracket had been beefed up then my next
> question
> would have been to ask what had been done to the attaching structure.
> working on that section soon I thought it would be good to investigate
> whether
> or not major changes had been made in that area that were adaptable to myXL
> Tim
>
> --------
> ______________
> CFII
> Champ L16A flying
> Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
> Working on fuselage
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 4326#204326
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
>
>
>
>
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: Recently completed Fuel Gauge Question |
On Sunday 14 September 2008 19:24, Gig Giacona wrote:
>
> Unless something has changed there are no E-LSA 601/650 at this time except
> the ones that received AW prior to the deadline for certifying
> non-conforming "Fat Ultralights."
>
> The reason for this is the mfg of the kit must also be the mfg of the
> conforming factory built S-LSA.
>
> For there to be a an E-LSA of the Zenith line then AMD is going to have to
> offer a kit or ZAC is going to have to offer a complete airplane.
>
> That said the builder of a conforming E-LSA has almost no leeway. They must
> follow the instruction pretty much to the letter.
That is pretty much what I would have expected, but I wasn't sure about the
status of the 601/650 as far as ELSA is concerned. The business relationship
of AMD/Zenith is a bit fuzzy to me. Thanks for that clarification.
It means that the 601/650 being built are experimental, and there is
considerable leeway in how fuel measurement is done.
Someone mentioned the problems on gauging the amount of fuel in the 15 gallon
tanks. I note that the AMD version has 15 gallon tanks. I wonder how they did
the measurement, and how accurate their indication of fuel level is?
=============================================
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
================================================
Jim B. Belcher
BS, MS Physics, math, Computer Science
A&P/IA
Instrument Rated Pilot
General Radio Telephone Certificate
================================================
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: Rear Spar attachment |
Tim Juhl wrote:
> I get the impression that the rear spar attachment bracket on the 650 is made
out of thicker material. Can anyone confirm that?
Here's a picture, with a ruler held up against it.
- Pat
--------
Patrick
601XL/Corvair
N63PZ (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 4451#204451
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/rearplate_202.jpg
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: | LSA OR EXPERIMENTAL |
Hi all
Getting ready to send off for the airworthy cert and I am planning to list it as
EXPERIMENTAL-AIRPLANE-AMATEUR BUILT rather than going the light sport. The
way I see it as long as my specification match the light sport regulations I am
good to go. Email me off line if you want
Thanks all
gljno10@hotmail.com
--------
601XL N676L reserved
ALMOST DONE
CHESAPEAKE VA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 4477#204477
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: Rear Spar attachment |
Thats about--- 0.1377949"--- :-)-
Do not archive.
--- On Mon, 9/15/08, PatrickW <pwhoyt@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: PatrickW <pwhoyt@yahoo.com>
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: Rear Spar attachment
<pwhoyt@yahoo.com>
Tim Juhl wrote:
> I get the impression that the rear spar attachment bracket on the 650 is
made out of thicker material. Can anyone confirm that?
Here's a picture, with a ruler held up against it.
- Pat
--------
Patrick
601XL/Corvair
N63PZ (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 4451#204451
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/rearplate_202.jpg
=0A=0A=0A
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! --
|