Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:02 AM - Re: Re: XL wing fold in flight (Brian Wood)
2. 06:02 AM - Re: Re: Ch650 anti oil canning on 601 (Jay Maynard)
3. 07:20 AM - First Flight (jaybannist@cs.com)
4. 07:48 AM - Re: First Flight (Jim Belcher)
5. 08:11 AM - Re: XL wing fold in flight (willemdelange)
6. 08:40 AM - Re: First Flight (David Downey)
7. 09:17 AM - Re: XL wing fold in flight (willemdelange)
8. 09:38 AM - Re: XL wing fold in flight (willemdelange)
9. 10:22 AM - Re: Ch650 anti oil canning on 601 (skyridersbn)
10. 12:17 PM - Re: Re: XL wing fold in flight (Craig Payne)
11. 12:48 PM - Re: Re: XL wing fold in flight (z 601)
12. 12:51 PM - Re: Re: XL wing fold in flight (Rick Lindstrom)
13. 12:53 PM - Crash in Brazil (Brian Wood)
14. 01:02 PM - Crash in Brazil (Brian Wood)
15. 01:12 PM - Re: First Flight (PatrickW)
16. 01:19 PM - Re: Re: XL wing fold in flight (Keith Ashcraft)
17. 01:40 PM - Re: Re: First Flight (jaybannist@cs.com)
18. 01:48 PM - Re: Re: XL wing fold in flight (Jim Belcher)
19. 05:52 PM - Re: [Probable Spam] Re: Re: XL wing fold in flight (LarryMcFarland)
20. 06:48 PM - 601XL Aileron Skin Rivet Pattern Question (Dave VanLanen)
21. 06:59 PM - [Probable Spam] Re: XL wing fold in flight (swater6)
22. 10:36 PM - Re: [Probable Spam] Re: XL wing fold in flight (LHusky@aol.com)
23. 11:36 PM - European ULM ( Ulralight ) 601xl (K Dilks)
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: XL wing fold in flight |
Here is a link to a you-tube video of a Zodiac XL 601 in Brazil that has
aileron balance weights installed. I am not endorsing nor condemning the
installation, I am not qualified to pass judgement, just for your
information.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_D4bt0guvM&feature=related
Brian in Brazil
Em Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:15:40 -0200, austria <kleinsaft@hotmail.com>
escreveu:
>
> Hello,
> have a look on this page: http://www.geocities.com/mgd3/flying/flutter
> The damage is like the same on the attached photo from a 601XL accident.
>
> austria
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210488#210488
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/zodiac_file_030_399.jpg
>
>
--
Usando o revolucionrio cliente de e-mail do Opera:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
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: Ch650 anti oil canning on 601 |
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 03:40:28PM -0600, Craig Payne wrote:
> It isn't too hard to make your own standard L's in 4 foot lengths with a
> simple wooden press break. Pictures attached.
A request: Please don't attach several hundred K of pictures to your emails.
Email is not the way to send pictures around. You can post to the Matronics
forum and attach them there, without flooding people's email inboxes with
them. Thanks.
--
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 http://www.tronguy.net/N55ZC.shtml
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 |
|
Friends,
Yesterday N2630J =9CLil Bruiser=9D took to the air for the first
time!
Scott Severen, test pilot for IndUS Aviation, flew her for about an hour.
=C2- Scott told me that he was thoroughly prepared for an unsavory experie
nce. Once in the air, though, he was pleasantly surprised and said he really
had fun doing the flight.=C2- He was highly complimentary about the fligh
t characteristics of the airplane; it was very easy to fly and everything wa
s as it should be.=C2- The Corvair engine performed strongly and flawlessl
y. I don=99t have all the numbers, but Scott reported that all tempera
tures and pressures stayed in the green, with RPMs up to 3200 and speeds up
to 120 mph.
The not-so-great photos were taken by me from the chase plane, an IndUS Thor
pedo flown by Ed Bandy.=C2- We flew out of Eagles Nest Estates (2TS6) and
Scott did several touch and goes at Mid-Way Regional (JWY).=C2-=C2- Over
all, a Great Day for me and =9CLil Bruiser=9D.
Jay in Dallas
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
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: First Flight |
In reading the recent list of tragic events, I find myself wondering if the
European version of the 601XL should not be given some other designation. It
appears there are significant differences between it and the US version.
Calling them both 601XL may be giving a false impression.
--
=============================================
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 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: XL wing fold in flight |
Supersedure:
Not applicable
Subject:
ZODIAC CH 601 XL (MICROLIGHTS OR HOMEBUILT AIRCRAFT) - GROUNDING
Applicability:
All Zodiac CH 601 XL (Micro Light or Homebuilt Aircraft)
Reason:
On the 14th of September 2008 a fatal accident occurred with a Micro Light Aircraft,
Type Zodiac CH 601 XL. There are indications that break-up of the wing structure
was the cause of the accident. Based on the preliminary findings of the
accident investigation of the Dutch Safety Board, the Civil Aviation Authority
of the Netherlands declares the aircraft not airworthy until further notice.
Effective date:
24 October 2008
Mandatory Actions and Compliance Times:
>From the effective date of this AD, the aircraft is grounded and shall not be
flown until appropriate action has been agreed in order to return the aircraft
to airworthiness.
Reference Publication(s):
None
Remarks
--------
Willem de Lange
CH601XL owner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210782#210782
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: First Flight |
Congrats Jay! Godspeed.
David L. Downey Harleysville-(SE) PA, USA
--- On Tue, 10/28/08, jaybannist@cs.com <jaybannist@cs.com> wrote:
From: jaybannist@cs.com <jaybannist@cs.com>
Subject: Zenith601-List: First Flight
et, ber0101@swbell.net, mstephan@shr.net
Friends,
Yesterday N2630J =93Lil Bruiser=94 took to the air for the first time!
Scott Severen, test pilot for IndUS Aviation, flew her for about an hour.
- Scott told me that he was thoroughly prepared for an unsavory experienc
e. Once in the air, though, he was pleasantly surprised and said he really
had fun doing the flight.- He was highly complimentary about the flight c
haracteristics of the airplane; it was very easy to fly and everything was
as it should be.- The Corvair engine performed strongly and flawlessly. I
don=92t have all the numbers, but Scott reported that all temperatures and
pressures stayed in the green, with RPMs up to 3200 and speeds up to 120 m
ph.
The not-so-great photos were taken by me from the chase plane, an IndUS Tho
rpedo flown by Ed Bandy.- We flew out of Eagles Nest Estates (2TS6) and S
cott did several touch and goes at Mid-Way Regional (JWY).-- Overall, a
Great Day for me and =93Lil Bruiser=94.
Jay in Dallas
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
=0A=0A=0A
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: XL wing fold in flight |
Nederlands Engels translate
FACTUAL INFORMATION
Proceedings of the flight
The PH-4B6, a micro-light plane aero (MLA) of the brand and type Zenair Zodiac
CH601 XL, take off from the airport Midden Meer (North-Holland).September 14,
2008 around 12:30 On board were two people: the owner / pilot and a passenger.
After the take-off from run-way -05 the aircraft flew in a northeasterly direction
north-east. At the height of the village Kreileroord a left turn of around
270 degrees was made which made the plane flew south to Medemblik. Above Medemblik
a 360 turn was made. The height during this stage of the flight ranged
between 1100 and 1300 ft. From the Medemblik the PH-4B6 flew to Hoorn. The plane
then flew on to the Lake of Hoorn. The plane flew at an altitude of about
1000 ft. There were witnesses on the ground seeing that the right wing folded
up and that the plane crashed in the water of the Marker Lake around 12:47.
The two occupants did not survive the crash.
RESEARCH
A researcher of the research board has been on the spot and after the saving of
the wreck did an initial investigation. At a later time an extensive technical
research was conducted with the help of a ground engineer. Later a part of
the main spar of the right wing and the rear spar has been removed. Also the GPS
unit and the speedometer where removed for further examination. The flight
data mentioned in this report are drawn from the GPS unit. Through the Aviation
Police witness statements were obtained.
The PH-4B6 is a Zenair Zodiac CH601 XL. In 2000 this aircraft has been developed
in the United States (U.S.) from earlier versions of the Zodiac CH601. The CH601
XL can be delivered as a "kit" in which the owner assembles the prefabricated
parts or as "ready to fly" where the aircraft has been fully assembled
and delivered by the manufacturer. In the U.S., this type of aircraft is accepted
under the category "Light Sport Aircraft". One of the consequences is that
the aircraft is not certified according to international airworthiness requirements.
The manufacturer declares that the design meets the requirements for this
category of aircraft and that the device is manufactured in accordance with
an approved method. The maximum take-off mass of this aircraft in the U.S. is
595 kg.
The same type of plane is built under license from the beginning of 2005 until
the end of 2006 in the Czech Republic, in particular for the European market.
To meet the criteria for European "Micro Light Airplane" (MLA) in the Czech Republic
a number of modifications where made to the model to the meet the requirement
of a maximum take-off mass of 450 kg. The accidents PH-4B6 is a Czech
Republic model.
The model fabricated in the Czech Republic is tested by the "Deutsche Aeroclub"
which resulted in a so-called "Gertekennblatt" was issued which stated that
the German plane meets the airworthiness requirements for MLA's . In the Netherlands,
among others this "Gertekennblatt" is used by the Traffic and Water Management
Inspectorate (IVW) to issue a "special airworthiness certificate" .
The same type of aircraft can also be registered as a "home built" aircraft in
the Dutch aircraft register. In that case, the aircraft meets the requirements
of amateur aircraft construction standards. The statutory requirement of a maximum
take-off mass of 450 kg it expires.
The preliminary investigation shows the following:
In the Dutch aircraft registry offers 12 aircraft of the type which registered
CH601 XL 8 as MLA and 4 are home built. In addition, we have 15 registered aircraft
of the type CH601 HD, HDS and UL. These are other versions of the type
CH601.
The PH-4B6 aircraft had a valid "special certificate of airworthiness."
A calculation shows that the mass of the airplane at the start probably at or slightly
above the maximum allowable off mass of 450 kg.
After reading from the GPS unit showed that the aircraft has made no extreme movements
and just before the time of the accident a straight flight at about 1000
ft exported.
The right wing moved up during the flight and folded back with the top of the wing
folded on the top of the fuselage behind the canopy.
The right wing is not broken.
The upper reinforcement of the main spar of the right wing is kinked and twisted,
just before the wing-fuselage attachment.
The bottom reinforcement of the main beam of the right wing is twisted, just before
the wing-fuselage confirmation.
The acting load factor of the wings was far below the permissible load factor.
Data from the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute show that the wind at
1000 ft from the direction of 070 blew with a force of 11 knots. The visibility
was more than 10 kilometers and there was no turbulence.
>From 2006 until today there have been at least seven accidents worldwide with
Zenair Zodiac CH601 where one or both wings have collapsed due to overloading.
These accidents have occurred in the United States, Britain and Spain. The investigation
into this accident has not (yet) pointed to a single cause for the
collapse of the wings.
A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown that the
outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably too optimistic.
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
The study by the Research Council for Security to the cause of this accident is
not yet completed. Nevertheless, the Council decided, in view of the seven similar
incidents elsewhere in the world and pending the final results of his research,
in this interim report all directly and indirectly involved must seriously
warn against the obvious risks in the use of this type plane.
--------
Willem de Lange
CH601XL owner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210796#210796
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: XL wing fold in flight |
Here is a quick and dirty translation opf the initial report
FACTUAL INFORMATION
Proceedings of the flight
The PH-4B6, a micro-light plane aero (MLA) of the brand and type Zenair Zodiac
CH601 XL, take off from the airport Midden Meer (North-Holland).September 14,
2008 around 12:30 On board were two people: the owner / pilot and a passenger.
After the take-off from run-way -05 the aircraft flew in a northeasterly direction
north-east. At the height of the village Kreileroord a left turn of around
270 degrees was made which made the plane flew south to Medemblik. Above Medemblik
a 360 turn was made. The height during this stage of the flight ranged
between 1100 and 1300 ft. From the Medemblik the PH-4B6 flew to Hoorn. The plane
then flew on to the Lake of Hoorn. The plane flew at an altitude of about
1000 ft. There were witnesses on the ground seeing that the right wing folded
up and that the plane crashed in the water of the Marker Lake around 12:47.
The two occupants did not survive the crash.
RESEARCH
A researcher of the research board has been on the spot and after the saving of
the wreck did an initial investigation. At a later time an extensive technical
research was conducted with the help of a ground engineer. Later a part of
the main spar of the right wing and the rear spar has been removed. Also the GPS
unit and the speedometer where removed for further examination. The flight
data mentioned in this report are drawn from the GPS unit. Through the Aviation
Police witness statements were obtained.
The PH-4B6 is a Zenair Zodiac CH601 XL. In 2000 this aircraft has been developed
in the United States (U.S.) from earlier versions of the Zodiac CH601. The CH601
XL can be delivered as a "kit" in which the owner assembles the prefabricated
parts or as "ready to fly" where the aircraft has been fully assembled
and delivered by the manufacturer. In the U.S., this type of aircraft is accepted
under the category "Light Sport Aircraft". One of the consequences is that
the aircraft is not certified according to international airworthiness requirements.
The manufacturer declares that the design meets the requirements for this
category of aircraft and that the device is manufactured in accordance with
an approved method. The maximum take-off mass of this aircraft in the U.S. is
595 kg.
The same type of plane is built under license from the beginning of 2005 until
the end of 2006 in the Czech Republic, in particular for the European market.
To meet the criteria for European "Micro Light Airplane" (MLA) in the Czech Republic
a number of modifications where made to the model to the meet the requirement
of a maximum take-off mass of 450 kg. The accidents PH-4B6 is a Czech
Republic model.
The model fabricated in the Czech Republic is tested by the "Deutsche Aeroclub"
which resulted in a so-called "Gertekennblatt" was issued which stated that
the German plane meets the airworthiness requirements for MLA's . In the Netherlands,
among others this "Gertekennblatt" is used by the Traffic and Water Management
Inspectorate (IVW) to issue a "special airworthiness certificate" .
The same type of aircraft can also be registered as a "home built" aircraft in
the Dutch aircraft register. In that case, the aircraft meets the requirements
of amateur aircraft construction standards. The statutory requirement of a maximum
take-off mass of 450 kg it expires.
The preliminary investigation shows the following:
In the Dutch aircraft registry offers 12 aircraft of the type which registered
CH601 XL 8 as MLA and 4 are home built. In addition, we have 15 registered aircraft
of the type CH601 HD, HDS and UL. These are other versions of the type
CH601.
The PH-4B6 aircraft had a valid "special certificate of airworthiness."
A calculation shows that the mass of the airplane at the start probably at or slightly
above the maximum allowable off mass of 450 kg.
After reading from the GPS unit showed that the aircraft has made no extreme movements
and just before the time of the accident a straight flight at about 1000
ft exported.
The right wing moved up during the flight and folded back with the top of the wing
folded on the top of the fuselage behind the canopy.
The right wing is not broken.
The upper reinforcement of the main spar of the right wing is kinked and twisted,
just before the wing-fuselage attachment.
The bottom reinforcement of the main beam of the right wing is twisted, just before
the wing-fuselage confirmation.
The acting load factor of the wings was far below the permissible load factor.
Data from the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute show that the wind at
1000 ft from the direction of 070 blew with a force of 11 knots. The visibility
was more than 10 kilometers and there was no turbulence.
>From 2006 until today there have been at least seven accidents worldwide with
Zenair Zodiac CH601 where one or both wings have collapsed due to overloading.
These accidents have occurred in the United States, Britain and Spain. The investigation
into this accident has not (yet) pointed to a single cause for the
collapse of the wings.
A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown that the
outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably too optimistic.
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
The study by the Research Council for Security to the cause of this accident is
not yet completed. Nevertheless, the Council decided, in view of the seven similar
incidents elsewhere in the world and pending the final results of his research,
in this interim report all directly and indirectly involved must seriously
warn against the obvious risks in the use of this type plane.
Nederlands Engels translate
--------
Willem de Lange
CH601XL owner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210801#210801
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: Ch650 anti oil canning on 601 |
I have received the information from Travis at Zenith. (There isn't a photo -
just info). According to Travis, here is what he said:
"Good morning Larry. I did a bit of checking and the 4' std. L can be cut in half
for use between the ribs. They will run parallel with the main spar 425 center
of rivet line to center of rivet line and are on the top skin only. So I figure
you will need 6 4' L angles."
I will have two wing lockers so none is required in that bay, buy plan according
if you don't have the lockers. I hope this helps everyone out.
Tailwinds and blue skies always,
--------
Larry Hursh (N650LM Reserved)
CH601XL (Conversion to CH650)
will be Corvair Powered
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210810#210810
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: XL wing fold in flight |
Key point is this:
"A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown that the
outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably too optimistic."
How do we reconcile this with the actual load testing (which was said to have been
conducted by an independent outside engineer)?
http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/6-photo-testing.html
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of willemdelange
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 10:17 AM
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing fold in flight
Nederlands Engels translate
FACTUAL INFORMATION
Proceedings of the flight
The PH-4B6, a micro-light plane aero (MLA) of the brand and type Zenair Zodiac
CH601 XL, take off from the airport Midden Meer (North-Holland).September 14,
2008 around 12:30 On board were two people: the owner / pilot and a passenger.
After the take-off from run-way -05 the aircraft flew in a northeasterly direction
north-east. At the height of the village Kreileroord a left turn of around
270 degrees was made which made the plane flew south to Medemblik. Above Medemblik
a 360 turn was made. The height during this stage of the flight ranged
between 1100 and 1300 ft. From the Medemblik the PH-4B6 flew to Hoorn. The plane
then flew on to the Lake of Hoorn. The plane flew at an altitude of about
1000 ft. There were witnesses on the ground seeing that the right wing folded
up and that the plane crashed in the water of the Marker Lake around 12:47.
The two occupants did not survive the crash.
RESEARCH
A researcher of the research board has been on the spot and after the saving of
the wreck did an initial investigation. At a later time an extensive technical
research was conducted with the help of a ground engineer. Later a part of
the main spar of the right wing and the rear spar has been removed. Also the GPS
unit and the speedometer where removed for further examination. The flight
data mentioned in this report are drawn from the GPS unit. Through the Aviation
Police witness statements were obtained.
The PH-4B6 is a Zenair Zodiac CH601 XL. In 2000 this aircraft has been developed
in the United States (U.S.) from earlier versions of the Zodiac CH601. The CH601
XL can be delivered as a "kit" in which the owner assembles the prefabricated
parts or as "ready to fly" where the aircraft has been fully assembled
and delivered by the manufacturer. In the U.S., this type of aircraft is accepted
under the category "Light Sport Aircraft". One of the consequences is that
the aircraft is not certified according to international airworthiness requirements.
The manufacturer declares that the design meets the requirements for this
category of aircraft and that the device is manufactured in accordance with
an approved method. The maximum take-off mass of this aircraft in the U.S. is
595 kg.
The same type of plane is built under license from the beginning of 2005 until
the end of 2006 in the Czech Republic, in particular for the European market.
To meet the criteria for European "Micro Light Airplane" (MLA) in the Czech Republic
a number of modifications where made to the model to the meet the requirement
of a maximum take-off mass of 450 kg. The accidents PH-4B6 is a Czech
Republic model.
The model fabricated in the Czech Republic is tested by the "Deutsche Aeroclub"
which resulted in a so-called "Gertekennblatt" was issued which stated that
the German plane meets the airworthiness requirements for MLA's . In the Netherlands,
among others this "Gertekennblatt" is used by the Traffic and Water Management
Inspectorate (IVW) to issue a "special airworthiness certificate" .
The same type of aircraft can also be registered as a "home built" aircraft in
the Dutch aircraft register. In that case, the aircraft meets the requirements
of amateur aircraft construction standards. The statutory requirement of a maximum
take-off mass of 450 kg it expires.
The preliminary investigation shows the following:
In the Dutch aircraft registry offers 12 aircraft of the type which registered
CH601 XL 8 as MLA and 4 are home built. In addition, we have 15 registered aircraft
of the type CH601 HD, HDS and UL. These are other versions of the type
CH601.
The PH-4B6 aircraft had a valid "special certificate of airworthiness."
A calculation shows that the mass of the airplane at the start probably at or slightly
above the maximum allowable off mass of 450 kg.
After reading from the GPS unit showed that the aircraft has made no extreme movements
and just before the time of the accident a straight flight at about 1000
ft exported.
The right wing moved up during the flight and folded back with the top of the wing
folded on the top of the fuselage behind the canopy.
The right wing is not broken.
The upper reinforcement of the main spar of the right wing is kinked and twisted,
just before the wing-fuselage attachment.
The bottom reinforcement of the main beam of the right wing is twisted, just before
the wing-fuselage confirmation.
The acting load factor of the wings was far below the permissible load factor.
Data from the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute show that the wind at
1000 ft from the direction of 070 blew with a force of 11 knots. The visibility
was more than 10 kilometers and there was no turbulence.
>From 2006 until today there have been at least seven accidents worldwide with
Zenair Zodiac CH601 where one or both wings have collapsed due to overloading.
These accidents have occurred in the United States, Britain and Spain. The investigation
into this accident has not (yet) pointed to a single cause for the
collapse of the wings.
A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown that the
outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably too optimistic.
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
The study by the Research Council for Security to the cause of this accident is
not yet completed. Nevertheless, the Council decided, in view of the seven similar
incidents elsewhere in the world and pending the final results of his research,
in this interim report all directly and indirectly involved must seriously
warn against the obvious risks in the use of this type plane.
--------
Willem de Lange
CH601XL owner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210796#210796
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: XL wing fold in flight |
On Tuesday 28 October 2008 14:17, Craig Payne wrote:
> <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
> Key point is this:
>
> "A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown
> that the outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably
> too optimistic."
>
> How do we reconcile this with the actual load testing (which was said to
> have been conducted by an independent outside engineer)?
Assuming there is a problem, the difference may lie in how the testing was
done. The load testing I saw posted on the Zenith site appears to have been
static, rather than dynamic, testing.
--
=============================================
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 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: XL wing fold in flight |
If I didn't misread the translated accident report, it states that the accident
aircraft "is a Czech Republic model."
I'm wondering how the construction differed to allow adequate useful load with
the 450 kg weight limitation, especially in the area of the rear spar fuselage
attachment.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
>From: Craig Payne <craig@craigandjean.com>
>Sent: Oct 28, 2008 12:17 PM
>To: zenith601-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing fold in flight
>
>
>Key point is this:
>
>"A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown that
the outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably too optimistic."
>
>How do we reconcile this with the actual load testing (which was said to have
been conducted by an independent outside engineer)?
>
>http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/6-photo-testing.html
>
>-- Craig
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of willemdelange
>Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 10:17 AM
>To: zenith601-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing fold in flight
>
>
>Nederlands Engels translate
>FACTUAL INFORMATION
>Proceedings of the flight
>The PH-4B6, a micro-light plane aero (MLA) of the brand and type Zenair Zodiac
CH601 XL, take off from the airport Midden Meer (North-Holland).September 14,
2008 around 12:30 On board were two people: the owner / pilot and a passenger.
>After the take-off from run-way -05 the aircraft flew in a northeasterly direction
north-east. At the height of the village Kreileroord a left turn of around
270 degrees was made which made the plane flew south to Medemblik. Above Medemblik
a 360 turn was made. The height during this stage of the flight ranged
between 1100 and 1300 ft. From the Medemblik the PH-4B6 flew to Hoorn. The plane
then flew on to the Lake of Hoorn. The plane flew at an altitude of about
1000 ft. There were witnesses on the ground seeing that the right wing folded
up and that the plane crashed in the water of the Marker Lake around 12:47.
The two occupants did not survive the crash.
>RESEARCH
>A researcher of the research board has been on the spot and after the saving
of the wreck did an initial investigation. At a later time an extensive technical
research was conducted with the help of a ground engineer. Later a part of
the main spar of the right wing and the rear spar has been removed. Also the
GPS unit and the speedometer where removed for further examination. The flight
data mentioned in this report are drawn from the GPS unit. Through the Aviation
Police witness statements were obtained.
>The PH-4B6 is a Zenair Zodiac CH601 XL. In 2000 this aircraft has been developed
in the United States (U.S.) from earlier versions of the Zodiac CH601. The
CH601 XL can be delivered as a "kit" in which the owner assembles the prefabricated
parts or as "ready to fly" where the aircraft has been fully assembled
and delivered by the manufacturer. In the U.S., this type of aircraft is accepted
under the category "Light Sport Aircraft". One of the consequences is that
the aircraft is not certified according to international airworthiness requirements.
The manufacturer declares that the design meets the requirements for
this category of aircraft and that the device is manufactured in accordance with
an approved method. The maximum take-off mass of this aircraft in the U.S.
is 595 kg.
>The same type of plane is built under license from the beginning of 2005 until
the end of 2006 in the Czech Republic, in particular for the European market.
To meet the criteria for European "Micro Light Airplane" (MLA) in the Czech Republic
a number of modifications where made to the model to the meet the requirement
of a maximum take-off mass of 450 kg. The accidents PH-4B6 is a Czech
Republic model.
>The model fabricated in the Czech Republic is tested by the "Deutsche Aeroclub"
which resulted in a so-called "Gertekennblatt" was issued which stated that
the German plane meets the airworthiness requirements for MLA's . In the Netherlands,
among others this "Gertekennblatt" is used by the Traffic and Water Management
Inspectorate (IVW) to issue a "special airworthiness certificate" .
>The same type of aircraft can also be registered as a "home built" aircraft in
the Dutch aircraft register. In that case, the aircraft meets the requirements
of amateur aircraft construction standards. The statutory requirement of a maximum
take-off mass of 450 kg it expires.
>The preliminary investigation shows the following:
>
>In the Dutch aircraft registry offers 12 aircraft of the type which registered
CH601 XL 8 as MLA and 4 are home built. In addition, we have 15 registered aircraft
of the type CH601 HD, HDS and UL. These are other versions of the type
CH601.
>
>The PH-4B6 aircraft had a valid "special certificate of airworthiness."
>
>A calculation shows that the mass of the airplane at the start probably at or
slightly above the maximum allowable off mass of 450 kg.
>
>After reading from the GPS unit showed that the aircraft has made no extreme movements
and just before the time of the accident a straight flight at about 1000
ft exported.
>
>The right wing moved up during the flight and folded back with the top of the
wing folded on the top of the fuselage behind the canopy.
>
>The right wing is not broken.
>
>The upper reinforcement of the main spar of the right wing is kinked and twisted,
just before the wing-fuselage attachment.
>
>The bottom reinforcement of the main beam of the right wing is twisted, just before
the wing-fuselage confirmation.
>
>The acting load factor of the wings was far below the permissible load factor.
>
>Data from the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute show that the wind at
1000 ft from the direction of 070 blew with a force of 11 knots. The visibility
was more than 10 kilometers and there was no turbulence.
>
>>From 2006 until today there have been at least seven accidents worldwide with
Zenair Zodiac CH601 where one or both wings have collapsed due to overloading.
These accidents have occurred in the United States, Britain and Spain. The investigation
into this accident has not (yet) pointed to a single cause for the
collapse of the wings.
>
>A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown that the
outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably too optimistic.
>PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
>The study by the Research Council for Security to the cause of this accident is
not yet completed. Nevertheless, the Council decided, in view of the seven similar
incidents elsewhere in the world and pending the final results of his research,
in this interim report all directly and indirectly involved must seriously
warn against the obvious risks in the use of this type plane.
>
>--------
>Willem de Lange
>CH601XL owner
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210796#210796
>
>
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 |
|
Was this crash in Brazil ever covered on this list? Here is a rough
translation (courtesy of Yahoo Babel Fish) with my clarificatons in
parenthesis. You can see the original here
http://aerodicas.blogspot.com/2008/05/acidentes.html Scroll down to where
you see the picture of PU-VHQ
The fall (crash) of an experimental single-engine aeroplane yesterday
caused the death of two people in the locality of Pavo, interior of Capon
of the Lion, in the South of the State. The aircraft model Zodiac CH 601
XL/RB TD, prefix PU-VHQ, was piloted for (by) agricultural aviator Ricardo
Volkweis Lopes, 51, that it (Who) had as accompanying mechanic Valdir
Silveira Lopes Son, 25. The two had been found died inside of the
airplane, disappeared in the afternoon of monday, 15 minutes after to take
off of the track of the Mirim Agricultural Aviation, in Capon of the
Leo.Conforme (According to) information of the direction (head, boss,
leadership) of the company, Lopes took off for return of 16h30min for a
leisure flight. As until 18h he had not returned nor made any contact, the
colleagues had started to look (for) it. At night, the searches had
followed without success until 3h with the aid of laborers of next ranches
to the place where if it esteem to have happened the accident. Yesterday,
since 5h, pilots of the Mirim carried through sobrevos (overflights) in
the area. To 9h30min, a group of search that followed for (by) land found
the airplane in a farm of the Brazilian Company of Farming Research
(Embrapa). The difficult access delayed the arrival of the teams of the
Firemen, the Policy and Institute-Generality de Percias (IGP). The rescue
of the bodies alone was concluded to (by) 15h. A team of the Infraero made
preliminary survey in the place and the result will be sent to the
Aeronautics. Commission agent Daltro Ulguim, person in charge of the
inquiry, said that the lack of skill specialized in the place will make it
difficult the verification. The destroos (wreckage) had been collected by
a team of the Mirim and led for the hangar of the company in Capon of the
Lion. Information confirmed for the Policy do not give account of that one
of the wings of the aircraft could have if freed and caused the fall of
the single-engine aeroplane, that was mounted artisan by Ricardo Lopes. In
a page in the Internet, the pilot, permitted has 32 years, published a
daily one on the assembly of the airplane. In the registers, he disclosed
to have started to execute the idea in 2006, after to visit a fair of
aviation in the United States. Lopes acquired a kit of parts as landing
gear, wing, commands and fuselage of a So Paulo company and started to
mount the aircraft in January of 2007. Still as the registers, in 14 of
March of 2008 the Zodiac was inspected by the responsible aeronautical
engineer for the project and its register in the National Agency of Civil
Aviation (Anac). Friends of work of Lopes count that the aircraft already
had 20 flight hours and were approved and set free. He took off for the
first time in last April. Private pilot since 1974 and agricultural one
since 1977, Lopes also was radioamador (amateur radio operator, HAM) and
gained notoriety when dialoguing, in 2006, with the astronaut Landmarks
Bridges, that mission in orbital station international ISS fulfilled.
--
Usando o revolucionrio cliente de e-mail do Opera:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
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 |
|
Here is the pertinent phrase from the report I just posted, with my
translation;
"Informaes no confirmadas pela Polcia do conta de que uma das asas da
aeronave poderia ter se soltado e causado a queda do monomotor,"
"Information that was not confirmed by the police, reported that one of
the wings of the aircraft could have come loose and caused the crash of
the single engine plane."
Brian
--
Usando o revolucionrio cliente de e-mail do Opera:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
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: First Flight |
jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:
> Yesterday N2630J Lil Bruiser took to the air for the first time!
Outstanding!
Seeing all the recent First Flights is a real strong motivator for those of us
who are still building. :-)
What was your test pilot worried about? He couldn't have been too concerned, otherwise
he wouldn't have taken it up in the first place, right...?
Well done, Jay!
- Pat
--------
Patrick
601XL/Corvair
N63PZ (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210840#210840
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: XL wing fold in flight |
Also, the link show not only static testing, but, for negative G's and not positive.
Also, wasn't there a mention about having to do design change to meet the European
"Micro Light Airplane" MLA 450kg (992lbs) weight limit.
Keith
CH701 - scratch
do not archive
************************************************************************
________________________________
From: Jim Belcher <z 601@anemicaardvark.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 1:49:27 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing fold in flight
On Tuesday 28 October 2008 14:17, Craig Payne wrote:
> <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
> Key point is this:
>
> "A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown
> that the outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably
> too optimistic."
>
> How do we reconcile this with the actual load testing (which was said to
> have been conducted by an independent outside engineer)?
Assuming there is a problem, the difference may lie in how the testing was
done. The load testing I saw posted on the Zenith site appears to have been
static, rather than dynamic, testing.
--
=============================================
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 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: First Flight |
The test pilot is accustomed to test flying factory built airplanes.=C2-
He occasionally has found problems early enough in a flight to abort the fli
ght. Now, here comes a home built job with a converted car engine.=C2- He
spent over two hours inspecting every aspect of the construction before he f
lew it. He was apparently convinced he could take off and get it back on the
ground quickly if he didn't like the way it flew.
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: PatrickW <pwhoyt@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 3:12 pm
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: First Flight
jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:
> Yesterday N2630J =C3=A2=82=AC=C5=93Lil Bruiser=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=9D too
k to the air for the first time!
Outstanding!
Seeing all the recent First Flights is a real strong motivator for those of
us
who are still building. :-)
What was your test pilot worried about? He couldn't have been too concerned
,
otherwise he wouldn't have taken it up in the first place, right...?
Well done, Jay!
- Pat
--------
Patrick
601XL/Corvair
N63PZ (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210840#210840
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
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: XL wing fold in flight |
On Tuesday 28 October 2008 15:19, Keith Ashcraft wrote:
> Also, the link show not only static testing, but, for negative G's and not
> positive. Also, wasn't there a mention about having to do design change to
> meet the European "Micro Light Airplane" MLA 450kg (992lbs) weight limit.
If I correctly understand, the weight limit in Europe is a part of their
rules, and does not necessarily indicate a structural problem with the
aircraft as it was designed for the U.S.
I believe the aircraft structure was changed somewhat to meet those standards.
Thus, I am of the belief that we may need to sort the crashes into two piles:
those of aircraft built to US standards, and those built to European
standards.
In his July, 2007 letter, Chris Heintz stated:
"To 'certify' the CH601XL in the LSA category, a complete stress analysis was
performed and confirmed for the positive loads be (sic) static tests. No
permanent deformations were found at limit loads (i.e. +4 'g') and no
failures at ultimate loads (i.e. +6 'g'). The bending deformations were in
accordance with the analysis and the torsional deformations were barely
measurable, removing the possibility wing or tail flutter."
While I find myself wondering how this proves the aircraft is not subject to
flutter, since it is a static test, he does say the tests were performed at
positive loads.
In March of this year, Heintz further stated:
"Among the aircraft that have experienced an in-flight break-up, all appear to
have been subjected to severe structural loads that are consistend with
"over-controlling" the aircraft. More specifically, and based on the
(limited) information I have, most accidents linked with a break-up suggest
excessive negative G forces caused, in whole or in part, by extreme elevator
input from the pilot and/or occupant of the aircraft..."
Obviously, this doesn't include the most recent accidents. I suspect his mod
to limit rudder travel was intended to make it more difficult to overcontrol
the aircraft. It does suggest that the aircraft may not like negative G
loads.
There are videos of pilots performing acrobatics in the aircraft, making me
wonder how widespread this practice may be.
--
=============================================
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 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: XL wing fold in flight |
Rick,
It seems likely that changes to satisfy the lesser design loads included the center
spar and caps, material and dimensions
nearest the wing attachment. That's a 25-percent reduction in carrying capacity.
Likely, the differences were cost factors,
otherwise the changes would not have been made. If this is a pessimistic view so
be it, but there shouldn't be a difference
in the way the 601XL is built in the US or overseas by contractor or one person.
(The maximum take-off mass of this aircraft in the U.S. is 595 kg.
To meet the criteria for European "Micro Light Airplane" (MLA) in the Czech Republic
a number of modifications where made to the model to the meet the requirement
of a maximum take-off mass of 450 kg.)
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Rick Lindstrom wrote:
>
> If I didn't misread the translated accident report, it states that the accident
aircraft "is a Czech Republic model."
>
> I'm wondering how the construction differed to allow adequate useful load with
the 450 kg weight limitation, especially in the area of the rear spar fuselage
attachment.
>
> Rick
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: Craig Payne <craig@craigandjean.com>
>> Sent: Oct 28, 2008 12:17 PM
>> To: zenith601-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing fold in flight
>>
>>
>> Key point is this:
>>
>> "A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown that
the outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably too optimistic."
>>
>> How do we reconcile this with the actual load testing (which was said to have
been conducted by an independent outside engineer)?
>>
>> http://www.zenithair.com/zodiac/6-photo-testing.html
>>
>> -- Craig
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of willemdelange
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 10:17 AM
>> To: zenith601-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing fold in flight
>>
>>
>> Nederlands Engels translate
>> FACTUAL INFORMATION
>> Proceedings of the flight
>> The PH-4B6, a micro-light plane aero (MLA) of the brand and type Zenair Zodiac
CH601 XL, take off from the airport Midden Meer (North-Holland).September 14,
2008 around 12:30 On board were two people: the owner / pilot and a passenger.
>> After the take-off from run-way -05 the aircraft flew in a northeasterly direction
north-east. At the height of the village Kreileroord a left turn of around
270 degrees was made which made the plane flew south to Medemblik. Above Medemblik
a 360 turn was made. The height during this stage of the flight ranged
between 1100 and 1300 ft. From the Medemblik the PH-4B6 flew to Hoorn. The
plane then flew on to the Lake of Hoorn. The plane flew at an altitude of about
1000 ft. There were witnesses on the ground seeing that the right wing folded
up and that the plane crashed in the water of the Marker Lake around 12:47.
The two occupants did not survive the crash.
>> RESEARCH
>> A researcher of the research board has been on the spot and after the saving
of the wreck did an initial investigation. At a later time an extensive technical
research was conducted with the help of a ground engineer. Later a part
of the main spar of the right wing and the rear spar has been removed. Also the
GPS unit and the speedometer where removed for further examination. The flight
data mentioned in this report are drawn from the GPS unit. Through the Aviation
Police witness statements were obtained.
>> The PH-4B6 is a Zenair Zodiac CH601 XL. In 2000 this aircraft has been developed
in the United States (U.S.) from earlier versions of the Zodiac CH601. The
CH601 XL can be delivered as a "kit" in which the owner assembles the prefabricated
parts or as "ready to fly" where the aircraft has been fully assembled
and delivered by the manufacturer. In the U.S., this type of aircraft is accepted
under the category "Light Sport Aircraft". One of the consequences is that
the aircraft is not certified according to international airworthiness requirements.
The manufacturer declares that the design meets the requirements for
this category of aircraft and that the device is manufactured in accordance
with an approved method. The maximum take-off mass of this aircraft in the U.S.
is 595 kg.
>> The same type of plane is built under license from the beginning of 2005 until
the end of 2006 in the Czech Republic, in particular for the European market.
To meet the criteria for European "Micro Light Airplane" (MLA) in the Czech
Republic a number of modifications where made to the model to the meet the requirement
of a maximum take-off mass of 450 kg. The accidents PH-4B6 is a Czech
Republic model.
>> The model fabricated in the Czech Republic is tested by the "Deutsche Aeroclub"
which resulted in a so-called "Gertekennblatt" was issued which stated that
the German plane meets the airworthiness requirements for MLA's . In the Netherlands,
among others this "Gertekennblatt" is used by the Traffic and Water
Management Inspectorate (IVW) to issue a "special airworthiness certificate"
.
>> The same type of aircraft can also be registered as a "home built" aircraft
in the Dutch aircraft register. In that case, the aircraft meets the requirements
of amateur aircraft construction standards. The statutory requirement of a
maximum take-off mass of 450 kg it expires.
>> The preliminary investigation shows the following:
>>
>> In the Dutch aircraft registry offers 12 aircraft of the type which registered
CH601 XL 8 as MLA and 4 are home built. In addition, we have 15 registered
aircraft of the type CH601 HD, HDS and UL. These are other versions of the type
CH601.
>>
>> The PH-4B6 aircraft had a valid "special certificate of airworthiness."
>>
>> A calculation shows that the mass of the airplane at the start probably at or
slightly above the maximum allowable off mass of 450 kg.
>>
>> After reading from the GPS unit showed that the aircraft has made no extreme
movements and just before the time of the accident a straight flight at about
1000 ft exported.
>>
>> The right wing moved up during the flight and folded back with the top of the
wing folded on the top of the fuselage behind the canopy.
>>
>> The right wing is not broken.
>>
>> The upper reinforcement of the main spar of the right wing is kinked and twisted,
just before the wing-fuselage attachment.
>>
>> The bottom reinforcement of the main beam of the right wing is twisted, just
before the wing-fuselage confirmation.
>>
>> The acting load factor of the wings was far below the permissible load factor.
>>
>> Data from the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute show that the wind
at 1000 ft from the direction of 070 blew with a force of 11 knots. The visibility
was more than 10 kilometers and there was no turbulence.
>>
>> >From 2006 until today there have been at least seven accidents worldwide with
Zenair Zodiac CH601 where one or both wings have collapsed due to overloading.
These accidents have occurred in the United States, Britain and Spain. The
investigation into this accident has not (yet) pointed to a single cause for
the collapse of the wings.
>>
>> A comprehensive examination design drawings of the U.S. draft has shown that
the outcome of the strength calculations by the designer was probably too optimistic.
>> PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
>> The study by the Research Council for Security to the cause of this accident
is not yet completed. Nevertheless, the Council decided, in view of the seven
similar incidents elsewhere in the world and pending the final results of his
research, in this interim report all directly and indirectly involved must seriously
warn against the obvious risks in the use of this type plane.
>>
>> --------
>> Willem de Lange
>> CH601XL owner
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210796#210796
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | 601XL Aileron Skin Rivet Pattern Question |
The diagram at the left-center of plans page 6-W-2 specifies the rivet
pattern for the front of the aileron skin to the front flanges of the ribs:
3 rivets A4, pitch 25mm from the top, then 22mm to each of the next 2
rivets. However, this does not look like the correct rivet pattern for the
aileron tip (6W2-4) because it has a longer front flange. I do not see any
notes in the plans specific to the rivet pattern for this flange, and I have
an older kit without the pre-drilled holes. Could someone who has the
pre-drilled holes please check the pitch and number of rivets and send me
this information?
Thanks,
Dave Van Lanen
601XL - tail done, working on wings
Do not archive
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: [Probable Spam] Re: XL wing fold in flight |
You don't need to modify an aircraft at all to lower the maximum gross weight.
You just lower the max weight on the certificate. It's done all the time with
LSA or with experimentals that the builder wants to fly using the LSA rules.
Do you think the all of these LSA's on the market just happen to have a max gross
of exactly 1320 lbs, the maximum allowable? They lower it when they need
to to meet the rules. Don't assume that the lower gross weight airframe necessarily
has less structure. (Although it could since it's all about G's.)
>From what I understand and have read is that the European XL uses the much lighter
composite landing gear to reduce airframe weight to achieve a reasonable
useful load under the lower gross weight limit. Others from Europe have posted
that the aircraft is identical other than that. (Britain has an elevator trim
spring connected to the flaps as a required mod too)
Also, I believe, the Netherlands allows registration under the Microlight rules
or the homebuilt rules. Not sure if they have the same weight limit.
--------
601 XL kit N596SW reserved
Tail, control surfaces and both wings complete. Now working on fuselage
www.scottwaters.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210897#210897
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: [Probable Spam] Re: XL wing fold in flight |
I had the chance to completely tear apart a CZAW aircraft. I am a scratch
builder and I know the parts really well. I looked over every inch of the
CZAW plane and it was identical. It even still had stickers with the same
part
numbers ZAC parts come with. The only differences that I know about is gea
r
channel, 6B5-7 is taller than the US version. There are also 6 stiffeners
on
the gear channel to support the gear. I have the composite gear and the
taller channel. The front spar looked identical to mine and everything els
e
measured out the same. I did not measure the skins though. There also was
an
extra rib in the leading edge of the wing. As for the quality of the plane
.
Exceptional Quality! I was very impressed with the quality of the plane, a
s
well as the little details. I have seen and worked on a few QBK here in th
e
states and I have seen them when they come out of the crate. The plane tha
t
I disassembled would put any of them to shame when it comes to the quality
of
construction. The owner became concerned with his safety after an incident
and parted it out and then ran over it with a bull dozer. I understand tha
t
he offered it to ZAC for testing and they declined. I did not see any
difference in the CZAW plane and the one I am building from plans. I was r
eally
looking for the smoking gun in the difference and found very little. My ge
ar
channel is so much stiffer than the stock ones, it is unreal. Those
stiffeners really do the trick. I keep looking at my rear spar attachment
and
wonder. I looked at the CZAW one really close and it was identical in ever
y way.
The plane had 360 hrs on it and there was no sign of damage. I did not tak
e
the wings apart, other than to remove the tanks, which I must say were a wo
rk
of art themselves. They have top mounted senders that were recessed in the
tank, so that they will fit under the skins. Very nice work. So, the only
difference I did not check on was the skin thickness used. Other than that
, I
found no real difference.
Larry Husky
Madras, Oregon
In a message dated 10/28/2008 7:00:20 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
waters.scott@comcast.net writes:
--> Zenith601-List message posted by: "swater6" <waters.scott@comcast.net>
You don't need to modify an aircraft at all to lower the maximum gross
weight. You just lower the max weight on the certificate. It's done all th
e time
with LSA or with experimentals that the builder wants to fly using the LSA
rules. Do you think the all of these LSA's on the market just happen to ha
ve a
max gross of exactly 1320 lbs, the maximum allowable? They lower it when
they need to to meet the rules. Don't assume that the lower gross weight
airframe necessarily has less structure. (Although it could since it's all
about
G's.)
>From what I understand and have read is that the European XL uses the much
lighter composite landing gear to reduce airframe weight to achieve a
reasonable useful load under the lower gross weight limit. Others from Eur
ope have
posted that the aircraft is identical other than that. (Britain has an
elevator trim spring connected to the flaps as a required mod too)
Also, I believe, the Netherlands allows registration under the Microlight
rules or the homebuilt rules. Not sure if they have the same weight limit.
--------
601 XL kit N596SW reserved
Tail, control surfaces and both wings complete. Now working on fuselage
www.scottwaters.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210897#210897
**************Play online games for FREE at Games.com! All of your favorites
,
no registration required and great graphics =93 check it out!
http://www.games.com?ncid=emlcntusgame00000001)
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: | European ULM ( Ulralight ) 601xl |
Until earlier this year worked in France. At that time I did not know I was going
to build a 601.
A few things to point out.
1. ULM planes in Europe have a max EMPTY weight of 275KG and max TO of 475kg. The
licence to fly these is less demanding .
2. What I have learnt before buying my kit ...arrives soon I hope is that the
Euro plane has .16" wing skins not .25" like the US planes, lighter landing gear,
the CH650 wing incedence, no anti oil canning stuff in the fuzz or wings.
Now it would be nice for Nic Heniz to tell everyone about this and to confirm
the CZAW planes were built this way as I have no concrete evidence..
3. While in France I notice the zodiac skins to be very loose and suffering badly
from oil canning, I also remember the rivet spacing on those thin skins was
very wide , it just did not look right.
So to summerise I think maybe there are two planes here and two differing potential
aeres of concern.
If the Euro plane has such thin skins to get the empty weight down I cant see
why they say it can be +4 -2 g limit, the same as the more beefy US planes.
This area has to be explain by Zenair.
Second is that of flying aerobatics and flying well over gross in the US spec
planes planes is a major cause for over stressing that design.
I think that the Euro planes should be called different to distance that plane
from the US version as suggest elswere on this list.
I ordered the US kit because of these factors.
Kit in Mid Atlantic.........
Regards
Kevin
--------
Austria ...guess where I work!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=210918#210918
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! --
|