Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:14 AM - Re: Canopy Safety (Thruster87)
2. 07:16 AM - Re: Re: Canopy Safety (jaybannist@cs.com)
3. 08:04 AM - Re: Re: Canopy Safety (Jay Maynard)
4. 02:04 PM - Re: Canopy Safety (Thruster87)
5. 08:19 PM - Re: Canopy Safety (lwhitlow)
6. 08:31 PM - Re: Canopy Safety (chris Sinfield)
7. 08:37 PM - Re: props (chris Sinfield)
8. 08:42 PM - Re: Re: Canopy Safety (jaybannist@cs.com)
9. 08:49 PM - Re: Re: props (Craig Payne)
10. 11:34 PM - Re: Re: props (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: Canopy Safety |
> PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:13 pm Post subject: Canopy Safety
> Yes, I have ascertained why it came open. But that is beside the point.
>
> As Jay Maynard pointed out, the latching system on the airplane I was flying
is not like the CH 601XL latch.
>
> Regardless of the latching system, I don't want a canopy to come open in flight,
EVER AGAIN, for whatever reason, period. I don't doubt the integrity of either
latching system; but neither one of them can absolutely overcome the carelessness
or pilot error that too often occurs in aviation.
>
> Jay in Dallas
> (That is Jay Bannister)
That was a rather harsh reply as it may or could prevent a similar situation for
someone else.The idea behind these forums is to discuss things in a healthy
way and NOT SHOOT the Messenger as I was not aware the new canopy was in service
already. Cheers T87
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 9266#209266
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: Canopy Safety |
T87, whoever you are,
I am sorry you took my reply as "harsh", and as intending to shoot the messenger.?
That was a long way from my intention.
My accident was a little over two months ago and I am still recovering from my
injuries.? The CFII who was with me is still in the hospital and will probably
be there hospital another six weeks. Even then, he will probably not be able
to walk.? His medical bills will be well over a million dollars, and I'm doubtful
that he will ever fly again. The airplane was destroyed.? All because the
canopy came open.
Is that sufficient reason for me to be emphatic?
I will say it again (for the benefit of ALL): I don't want a canopy to come open
in flight, EVER AGAIN, for whatever reason, period.
Jay Bannister
-----Original Message-----
From: Thruster87 <alania@optusnet.com.au>
Sent: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 5:14 am
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: Canopy Safety
> PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:13 pm Post subject: Canopy Safety
> Yes, I have ascertained why it came open. But that is beside the point.
>
> As Jay Maynard pointed out, the latching system on the airplane I was flying
is not like the CH 601XL latch.
>
> Regardless of the latching system, I don't want a canopy to come open in
flight, EVER AGAIN, for whatever reason, period. I don't doubt the integrity of
either latching system; but neither one of them can absolutely overcome the
carelessness or pilot error that too often occurs in aviation.
>
> Jay in Dallas
> (That is Jay Bannister)
That was a rather harsh reply as it may or could prevent a similar situation for
someone else.The idea behind these forums is to discuss things in a healthy way
and NOT SHOOT the Messenger as I was not aware the new canopy was in service
already. Cheers T87
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 9266#209266
________________________________________________________________________
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: Canopy Safety |
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 03:14:12AM -0700, Thruster87 wrote:
> That was a rather harsh reply as it may or could prevent a similar
> situation for someone else.The idea behind these forums is to discuss
> things in a healthy way and NOT SHOOT the Messenger as I was not aware the
> new canopy was in service already. Cheers T87
I posted about it back in June when I took delivery of my airplane. Even so,
I understand that not everyone may know about it.
I'll cut Jay B a lot of slack. He took some fairly serious injuries in his
crash, and I can certainly understand his desire to help others avoid the
same fate. When commenting on others' misfortune, it's a good idea to avoid
sounding like you're criticizing something that doesn't apply.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC
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: Canopy Safety |
>
> I posted about it back in June when I took delivery of my airplane. Even so,
> I understand that not everyone may know about it.
>
> I'll cut Jay B a lot of slack. He took some fairly serious injuries in his
> crash, and I can certainly understand his desire to help others avoid the
> same fate. When commenting on others' misfortune, it's a good idea to avoid
> sounding like you're criticizing something that doesn't apply.
I was not aware of this accident so I only took it on what was said in the reply.Obviously
one would try to avoid criticizing other's misfortunes.In aviation
it has always been crucial to find reasons for accidents and I was just asking
a simple question so it seemed at the time.Anyhow hope Jay gets back to 100%
ASAP Cheers T87 [the T stands for a Thruster Aircraft and the 87 is the year
it was made]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 9301#209301
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: Canopy Safety |
Jay
I looked at your drawing and I'm a bit concerned.
It seems while your cable will prevent the canopy from opening in flight, it will
also prevent rescuers from getting to you on the ground if you are incapacitated
and unable to pull the pin.
Perhaps the pin could be moved to one side or the other and a punch in cap installed
to allow someone from outside the aircraft to pull the pin and get you
out if needed.
Glad to hear your getting better and my best wishes for your instructor as well
Larry Whitlow
jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:
> As you may know, the canopy of the AMD 601XLi I was flying came open; flew up
to about 50 degrees and the airplane became uncontrollable. As soon as I had
recovered enough to get around, the very first thing I did was to install a safety
cable to the canopy of my airplane, Lil Bruiser. I have attached drawing
of what I installed. I made the cable just long enough, when pinned, that the
canopy can be open a little for taxi on hot days. I am probably going to add
a removable nylon strap that will be long enough to help pull the canopy down
when seated. Let me know if you have any questions.
>
> Jay in Dallas
> Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com (http://www.cs.com)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 9320#209320
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: Canopy Safety |
In Australia
we are recommending in the SAAA and the RAA are making it mandatory for putting
in an extra safety latch or cable to all our Zodiac XL's with the older thinner
Aero Plastics 80 thou canopy's. It appears that the older 2 stage locking mechanism
is easy to not lock properly. This results in it only locking to the
first stage and popping up just after take off.
It normally happens on the passenger side, as they don't like to slam the canopy
, so lowering gently and not locking it fully.
Don't work , with the older thinner canopy if you have an accident and people
need to get into the cabin to rescue you, the older thinner canopy would be easily
broken by a fist, shoe or even yelling at it.. (well you would have to yell
hard).
We can either have a cable system as Jan's one above or an extra lock on each side
of the normal lock. If you upgrade to the newer canopy system you don't need
to do this or get a Todd's Canopy as they are 120 thou.
I will try and attach some photos.
Chris.
Sydney
XL Jab3300
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 9321#209321
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/harrypercent20picspercent200271_814.jpg
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 |
|
Rumor has it this particular prop works
very well on the XL while the Sensenich composite ground adjustable may not.
Dont tell me this Paul as I just bought the ground adjustable one. I thought it
was OK with the Jab USA FWF kit from Pete..
Chris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 9322#209322
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: Canopy Safety |
Larry,
I was concerned about that also.? But as someone pointed out earlier, if rescuers
get to the wreck and you can't get out, they are going to break the canopy
bubble to get you out. The airplane is probably crunched anyway, so breaking the
canopy bubble is no big deal.? Even in my crash, the canopy was open, but the
rescuers had to cut the instructor out of the fuselage with "Jaws of Life."?
I used the safety pin with a large ring, so I could get it out and release the
canopy if I was able.
Jay in Dallas
-----Original Message-----
From: lwhitlow <ldwhitlow@comcast.net>
Sent: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:19 pm
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: Canopy Safety
Jay
I looked at your drawing and I'm a bit concerned.
It seems while your cable will prevent the canopy from opening in flight, it
will also prevent rescuers from getting to you on the ground if you are
incapacitated and unable to pull the pin.
Perhaps the pin could be moved to one side or the other and a punch in cap
installed to allow someone from outside the aircraft to pull the pin and get
you out if needed.
Glad to hear your getting better and my best wishes for your instructor as well
Larry Whitlow
jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:
> As you may know, the canopy of the AMD 601XLi I was flying came open; flew up
to about 50 degrees and the airplane became uncontrollable. As soon as I had
recovered enough to get around, the very first thing I did was to install a
safety cable to the canopy of my airplane, Lil Bruiser. I have attached drawing
of what I installed. I made the cable just long enough, when pinned, that the
canopy can be open a little for taxi on hot days. I am probably going to add a
removable nylon strap that will be long enough to help pull the canopy down when
seated. Let me know if you have any questions.
>
> Jay in Dallas
> Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
(http://www.cs.com)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 9320#209320
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
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 |
|
It is not a rumor but not as bad as Paul says. On one of the FWF DVDs Pete
says something like "the adjustable prop is nice but it will cost you 2 or 3
knots"
My feeling is that since you can adjust it you will be able to make the
adjustable prop fit your flying goals better than a fixed wooden prop.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of chris
Sinfield
Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 9:37 PM
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: props
<chris_sinfield@yahoo.com.au>
Rumor has it this particular prop works
very well on the XL while the Sensenich composite ground adjustable may not.
Dont tell me this Paul as I just bought the ground adjustable one. I thought
it was OK with the Jab USA FWF kit from Pete..
Chris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 9322#209322
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 |
|
Hi Chris,
Actually it was Pete that told me it didn't work well, so he sold me
the wood prop when I bought the engine and FWF from him.
Paul
do not archive
At 08:37 PM 10/18/2008, you wrote:
><chris_sinfield@yahoo.com.au>
>
> Rumor has it this particular prop works
>very well on the XL while the Sensenich composite ground adjustable may not.
>
>Dont tell me this Paul as I just bought the ground adjustable one. I
>thought it was OK with the Jab USA FWF kit from Pete..
>Chris
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! --
|