Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:23 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (Darryl Legg)
2. 06:20 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (leinad)
3. 06:30 AM - Fw: New e-mail (Bill Naumuk)
4. 06:50 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (Darryl Legg)
5. 08:37 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Terry Phillips)
6. 09:01 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Bryan Martin)
7. 09:18 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (Sabrina)
8. 09:20 AM - Fw: E-mail address change (Bill Naumuk)
9. 09:32 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Jim Belcher)
10. 09:43 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (Darryl Legg)
11. 09:45 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (Sabrina)
12. 09:45 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Elden Jacobson)
13. 10:07 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (Darryl Legg)
14. 10:25 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (Sabrina)
15. 10:52 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Elden Jacobson)
16. 10:57 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Carlos Sa)
17. 10:57 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (jaybannist@cs.com)
18. 11:22 AM - Re: XL wing concerns (Sabrina)
19. 11:38 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (jaybannist@cs.com)
20. 11:57 AM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Jim Belcher)
21. 12:18 PM - Membership - was "Re: Re: XL wing concerns" (Carlos Sa)
22. 01:12 PM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Jim Belcher)
23. 01:29 PM - Re: XL wing concerns (Sabrina)
24. 01:40 PM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Jim Belcher)
25. 02:01 PM - Re: XL wing concerns (Sabrina)
26. 02:33 PM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Jim Belcher)
27. 02:41 PM - Re: XL wing concerns (Sabrina)
28. 02:56 PM - Re: XL wing concerns (Sabrina)
29. 03:07 PM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Terry Phillips)
30. 03:21 PM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Ronald Steele)
31. 03:23 PM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (jaybannist@cs.com)
32. 03:24 PM - Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Sabrina)
33. 03:36 PM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (Jim Belcher)
34. 03:49 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (jaybannist@cs.com)
35. 04:56 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Paul Mulwitz)
36. 04:59 PM - Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Sabrina)
37. 05:06 PM - Re: Re: XL wing concerns (David Downey)
38. 05:21 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Bryan Martin)
39. 05:37 PM - Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Sabrina)
40. 05:41 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (jaybannist@cs.com)
41. 05:53 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Jay Maynard)
42. 06:26 PM - Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (chris Sinfield)
43. 06:43 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Bryan Martin)
44. 06:45 PM - Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Walter Carey)
45. 06:46 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Paul Mulwitz)
46. 07:26 PM - Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (Sabrina)
47. 07:32 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (David Downey)
48. 08:37 PM - Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy (chris Sinfield)
49. 10:46 PM - Re: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy. (Gary Gower)
50. 11:04 PM - Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy. (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: XL wing concerns |
why is it that I can't read Sabrina's posts? Have tried IE and Mozilla browsers.
weird.
Darryl
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223825#223825
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: XL wing concerns |
Darryl,
I have the same problem with Sabrina's and occasionally other posts that are blank.
I emailed Matt Dralle about it once but didn't get any reply. I'm reading
these posts from the web forum, and not via email. Once in a while Sabrina
posts something that I can read, but 95% of her posts are blank. It's obvious
others are reading them because they post replies to her's.
Dan Dempsey
Darryl Legg wrote:
> why is it that I can't read Sabrina's posts? Have tried IE and Mozilla browsers.
weird.
> Darryl
>
--------
Scratch building XL with Corvair Engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223834#223834
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 |
|
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Naumuk
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 9:29 AM
Subject: New e-mail
All-
After 2-1/2 years, Windstream has finally ditched the old allel.net
extension and required windstream.net. They said that either would work
until 5/15/09 and I just wanted to make sure. Since I can get nearly a
real-time reply from you guys, you were the guinea pigs. Thanks.
naumuk@windstream.net
do not archive
Bill Naumuk
Townville, Pa.
HDS 601MG/Corvair 95%
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: XL wing concerns |
Thanks Dan,
Like you I can't see anything, but obviously others can. Can anyone help?
Darryl. :?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223842#223842
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 concerns |
Darryl
One of the little known features of the Matronics user interface is that,
once one logs on to the BBS Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists,
you can edit your previous posts. (For that matter you may be able to edit
other folk's posts also, I do not know about that.) Sabrina posted a
message a few months ago to the effect that she routinely deletes her posts
after some period of time. So, unless you read the Matronics lists by via
email (and save the messages), you may not have retroactive access to the
content of posts that have been edited.
Unfortunately, this feature has the potential to greatly reduce the value
of the Matronics archives. So, the word to the wise on-line reader of the
Zenith-List is,
"If you see something that is really valuable or important to you, then you
might want to save it on your PC for future reference."
(The Scrapbook add-on to Firefox will save web pages on your local
computer. IE may have a similar capability.) Unfortunately, it is sometimes
difficult to anticipate, today, what information will be very important to
me 4 months after today.
One other annoying "feature" of the Matronics user interface is that,
occasionally, a message seems to show up with the BBS Interface, but not
make it to my computer through the email list. Some times I'll see a post
that replies to an earlier post that I've not received. If I follow the
link to the BBS Interface that is insesrted into emailed posts,
Viola--there is the missing post. I don't know why I never received the
original post by email.
In summary, missing or incomplete posts are not caused by your browser.
They are a "feature" of the Matronics user interface.
Terry
At 03:22 AM 1/10/2009 -0800, you wrote:
>why is it that I can't read Sabrina's posts? Have tried IE and Mozilla
>browsers. weird.
>Darryl
>Do not archive
Terry Phillips ZBAGer
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail, flaps, & ailerons
are done; working on the wings
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/
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: XL wing concerns |
I just checked and I can't read her posts on the web forum either, I
don't recall having a problem reading them in my email reader though.
I have tried Firefox and Safari on my Mac with no luck. The others
that are reading and replying to her posts may be doing so in an email
reader. Since others are having trouble reading her posts on the web,
there may be nothing wrong on your end, it might be something on her
end.
>
>
> Darryl,
> I have the same problem with Sabrina's and occasionally other posts
> that are blank. I emailed Matt Dralle about it once but didn't get
> any reply. I'm reading these posts from the web forum, and not via
> email. Once in a while Sabrina posts something that I can read, but
> 95% of her posts are blank. It's obvious others are reading them
> because they post replies to her's.
> Dan Dempsey
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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 concerns |
My comments are for those who are concerned, not just the casual reader or someone
surfing the Internet in the future. Zenith, Zenair, FAA, NTSB, LAA people
and countless builders subscribe to the list and receive all our posts via e-mail.
(Even Jim Irwin subscribes!) So join and subscribe, don't just be a
guest or a passive member.
So... I finished intersession week, met with a top Fermi Lab physicist for dinner
last night along with a King Air owner/pilot and we had an interesting discussion
about the slight forward sweep of the wings in cruise attitude....
as far as loosing parts, the aileron bell crank mount is one item you might not
mind loosing-- I redesigned it using Aircraft Spruce parts... and Gig is correct,
order the replacement and the original magically reappears... (nose gear
stop plate in my case.) As to the bell crank, I changed the geometry, beefed
up the rib, raised and shrunk the hole in the rear spar.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223873#223873
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: | Fw: E-mail address change |
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Naumuk
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 12:20 PM
Subject: E-mail address change
All-
Thanks to Matt, all is changed over.
do not archive
Bill Naumuk
Townville, Pa.
HDS 601MG/Corvair 95%
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: XL wing concerns |
On Saturday 10 January 2009 11:18, Sabrina wrote:
> as far as loosing parts, the aileron bell crank mount is one item you might
> not mind loosing-- I redesigned it using Aircraft Spruce parts... and Gig
> is correct, order the replacement and the original magically reappears...
> (nose gear stop plate in my case.) As to the bell crank, I changed the
> geometry, beefed up the rib, raised and shrunk the hole in the rear spar.
Would you be interested in sharing the reasoning behind your changes, and what
the specific changes were? I'm not a structures guy, but the bellcrank looks
beefy in comparison to that mount, and the reinforcement added to the rib.
--
=============================================
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 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 concerns |
Hi Sabrina,
I am a member, and subscribe, and still don't see why any-ones post can't be viewed.
Please tell.
Darryl.
:?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223881#223881
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 concerns |
Jim, no problem, just join the list so I can PM you... :o)
it us not the beef of the bellcrank as much as the geometry... the beef of the
rib and rear spar is another question...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223882#223882
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 concerns |
Sabrina,
-
Can you post drawings of the bellcrank change(s)?
-
Thanks,
Elden Jacobson
xl/3300
Do not archive
--- On Sun, 1/11/09, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing concerns
<chicago2paris@msn.com>
My comments are for those who are concerned, not just the casual reader or
someone surfing the Internet in the future. Zenith, Zenair, FAA, NTSB, LA
A
people and countless builders subscribe to the list and receive all our pos
ts
via e-mail. (Even Jim Irwin subscribes!) So join and subscribe, don't
just be a guest or a passive member.
So... I finished intersession week, met with a top Fermi Lab physicist for
dinner last night along with a King Air owner/pilot and we had an interesti
ng
discussion about the slight forward sweep of the wings in cruise attitude..
..
as far as loosing parts, the aileron bell crank mount is one item you might
not
mind loosing-- I redesigned it using Aircraft Spruce parts... and Gig is
correct, order the replacement and the original magically reappears... (no
se
gear stop plate in my case.) As to the bell crank, I changed the geometry,
beefed up the rib, raised and shrunk the hole in the rear spar.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223873#223873
=0A=0A=0A
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: XL wing concerns |
Hi Sabrina,
I receive daily digests via e-mail and browse the forums occasionally, just today
noticing that your posts were blank. In fact, your post changed on the forum
just now, did you edit it? Very strange mate!
Darryl.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223886#223886
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: XL wing concerns |
Once Elden posted why keep the original?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223888#223888
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: XL wing concerns |
You lost me on this one.
--- On Sun, 1/11/09, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing concerns
<chicago2paris@msn.com>
Once Elden posted why keep the original?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223888#223888
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 concerns |
Why not ????
2009/1/10 Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
>
> Once Elden posted why keep the original?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223888#223888
>
>
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: XL wing concerns |
I want to chastise many of the posters to this forum. (I'm not picking on Sabrina,
alone)
Consider this posting:
Once Elden posted why keep the original?
It obviously has nothing to do with "XL wing concerns".
Without context, the statement is totally meaningless.
PLEASE :
1) When the subject changes, change the subject line
2) Include some hint of context so your post will make sense and have some relevance.
Jay in Dallas
Do not archive
________________________________________________________________________
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 concerns |
Jim, Elden, Jay, Carlos, please join the list as a registered user...
Jay, you can't change the subject line on a "mass-PM" only private PMs. The post
you complain about was not on the list until you and other "guests" posted it.
Those who subscribe have the context via the previous e-mails.
The only way I can reach a "guest" and stay within the list is through this mass
PM. Sorry.
I know there are e-mails, but I receive hundreds of e-mails and 99% go to spam
and never reach me.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223896#223896
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 concerns |
Sabrina,
I am a card-carrying, registered member of this list (NOT a "guest"), and I have
no idea what a "PM" is, other than after noon, or what a "mass-PM" is.
I can and do change the subject line when it is appropriate.
Jay in Dallas
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Sent: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 1:21 pm
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing concerns
Jim, Elden, Jay, Carlos, please join the list as a registered user...
Jay, you can't change the subject line on a "mass-PM" only private PMs. The post
you complain about was not on the list until you and other "guests" posted it.
Those who subscribe have the context via the previous e-mails.
The only way I can reach a "guest" and stay within the list is through this mass
PM. Sorry.
I know there are e-mails, but I receive hundreds of e-mails and 99% go to spam
and never reach me.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223896#223896
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
On Saturday 10 January 2009 13:21, Sabrina wrote:
>
> Jim, Elden, Jay, Carlos, please join the list as a registered user...
Sabrina, as best as I can tell, I joined the list as a registered user last
July. If I correctly understand how the list works, it won't forward email to
me unless I am registered. I still have the email on file from Matt welcoming
me.
Having said that, when I go to the list of users, I find neither my name nor
any of the psuedonyms I normally use. I'm going to email Matt and see if he
can clarify my status.
--
=============================================
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 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: XL wing concerns" |
I guess when a post is originated by email, it gets written to the forum and
the originator is identified as "guest" given that he/she is not logged on
to the forum.
Jim, if I am receiving your posts, you and I are certainly members of this
list (as I have been for - gasp! - 10 years).
Carlos
CH601-HD, plans
do not archive
2009/1/10 Jim Belcher <z601@anemicaardvark.com>
> >
>
> On Saturday 10 January 2009 13:21, Sabrina wrote:
> >
> > Jim, Elden, Jay, Carlos, please join the list as a registered user...
>
> Sabrina, as best as I can tell, I joined the list as a registered user last
> July. If I correctly understand how the list works, it won't forward email
> to
> me unless I am registered. I still have the email on file from Matt
> welcoming
> me.
>
> Having said that, when I go to the list of users, I find neither my name
> nor
> any of the psuedonyms I normally use. I'm going to email Matt and see if he
> can clarify my status.
> --
>
>
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: XL wing concerns |
On Saturday 10 January 2009 13:32, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
> Sabrina,
>
> I am a card-carrying, registered member of this list (NOT a "guest"), and I
> have no idea what a "PM" is, other than after noon, or what a "mass-PM" is.
I think a "PM" is a personal message. What I suspect is, at least in my case,
while I'm obviously a member, my name doesn't appear to be showing up in the
list of members. It looks as thought that's necessary to send me a personal
message with the information I requested. How the personal message mechanism
works, I don't know, but I found "tags" allowing the sending of personal
messages in the list of members.
This sounds like a typical software glitch. It may be that you, Elden, Carlos
and I for some reason don't show up in that list.
Sign. I remind myself sometimes that I was once one of the young turks who
wanted to computerize everything. Here we are, nearly 40 years later, and I
got my wish. Payback is a bummer.
--
=============================================
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 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
Now that that is cleared up, does anyone want to talk airplane?
XL Wing Concerns:
First concern I remember having in early 2006 was the size and placement of the
aileron push rod hole in the rear spar...
I don't think anyone would place that large of a hole (compared to the height of
the beam) that low in their floor joists...
Comments...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223918#223918
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
On Saturday 10 January 2009 15:28, Sabrina wrote:
> Now that that is cleared up, does anyone want to talk airplane?
I think the problem is more postponed than cleared up, but we can hope.
> XL Wing Concerns:
>
> First concern I remember having in early 2006 was the size and placement of
> the aileron push rod hole in the rear spar...
>
> I don't think anyone would place that large of a hole (compared to the
> height of the beam) that low in their floor joists...
>
> Comments...
Drawing 6W7, dated 01/08, shows a 38mm (dia) hole at station 1995, centered
20mm from the rear spar edge. Unless somebody has changed the rules of math,
half of 38mm is 19mm, which would leave 1mm of rear spar material at the
bottom.
I find myself somewhat unwilling to cut a hole of this dimension at that
location. I wonder if anyone actually did this....
--
=============================================
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 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
If you are going to change the location, you have to give up leverage (repositioning
the horn slightly) and/or align the bellcrank better...
when you reposition the bellcrank, you shift the aileron cables and the bellcrank
may bottom out on the rib's lightening holes. This may require a larger extruded
angle to reposition the bellcrank further away from the rib.
this repositions the aileron balance cable so it is not so close to 6B5-1, which
I never liked... the second fairlead mounted to 6B5-1 should be a hint that
something is amiss... see 6-B-22
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223923#223923
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
On Saturday 10 January 2009 16:00, Sabrina wrote:
>
> If you are going to change the location, you have to give up leverage
> (repositioning the horn slightly) and/or align the bellcrank better...
>
> when you reposition the bellcrank, you shift the aileron cables and the
> bellcrank may bottom out on the rib's lightening holes. This may require a
> larger extruded angle to reposition the bellcrank further away from the
> rib.
>
> this repositions the aileron balance cable so it is not so close to 6B5-1,
> which I never liked... the second fairlead mounted to 6B5-1 should be a
> hint that something is amiss... see 6-B-22
This is disturbing. A reason for doing engineering is to find problems before
metal is cut and things are assembled. This design has been in the field for
several years, yet it does not appear this problem has been identified or
resolved.
If drawing 6W10 is to be believed, there is no reason to have the hole quite
this low in the rear spar. Is there, once the metal is assembled, the
potential to reduce the size of the hole?
The real problem would appear to be the configuration of the control horn on
the aileron. It might have been better structurallly to have the horn below
the aileron, and to have a bent pushrod that exited through the lower
aircraft skin. That would have required a slot in the skin, but I believe
this could be done with less structural impact.
That, however, would create slop in the pushrod motion, which is also
undesirable. I don't think the pushrod, as it is presently designed, would
work in this configuration.
I haven't gotten to the point of checking the location of the aileron balance
cable relative to 6B5-1. However, it looks like this part of the design dug a
nice little hole, which the designer(s) then kludged the rest of this part of
the control mechanism to fix.
I also wonder about putting some reinforcement along the bottom of the rear
spar, lapping the hole area. But it would still require moving the hole
upwards some. That 1mm dimension isn't going to cut it in any approach I can
imagine.
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 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
Stavt slep specifikace
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223927#223927
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
Like this:
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223929#223929
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/original_horn_471.jpg
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
Hi Jim
First, I know of no evidence that suggests failure in the rear spar at this
point. None-the-less, some folks have been concerned about this potential
weakness. I have seen quickbuild spars that have the hole very close to the
flange. See photo attached.
Andy Elliott expressed concern about this issue some time ago and suggested
a doubler for the bottom flange. See
http://members.cox.net/n601ge/drawings/rearspar.html
If you are concerned you might try Andy's idea.
Terry
At 04:35 PM 1/10/2009 -0600, Jim wrote:
>This is disturbing. A reason for doing engineering is to find problems
>before
>metal is cut and things are assembled. This design has been in the field for
>several years, yet it does not appear this problem has been identified or
>resolved.
>
>If drawing 6W10 is to be believed, there is no reason to have the hole quite
>this low in the rear spar. Is there, once the metal is assembled, the
>potential to reduce the size of the hole?
>
>The real problem would appear to be the configuration of the control horn on
>the aileron. It might have been better structurallly to have the horn below
>the aileron, and to have a bent pushrod that exited through the lower
>aircraft skin. That would have required a slot in the skin, but I believe
>this could be done with less structural impact.
>
>That, however, would create slop in the pushrod motion, which is also
>undesirable. I don't think the pushrod, as it is presently designed, would
>work in this configuration.
>
>I haven't gotten to the point of checking the location of the aileron balance
>cable relative to 6B5-1. However, it looks like this part of the design dug a
>nice little hole, which the designer(s) then kludged the rest of this part of
>the control mechanism to fix.
>
>I also wonder about putting some reinforcement along the bottom of the rear
>spar, lapping the hole area. But it would still require moving the hole
>upwards some. That 1mm dimension isn't going to cut it in any approach I can
>imagine.
Terry Phillips ZBAGer
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail, flaps, & ailerons
are done; working on the wings
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
I share your concern and was very careful making that hole, drilling a
little undersized and then filing.
However, look at where the hole is along the length of the spare. No
where near the full strength of the spar is needed that far from the
root. As long as you stay out of the flange I'm sure there is plenty
of strength remaining. You just want to sure not to cut into the
flange.
As far as beams go, if the beam was cut this much at the end, which is
pure shear and not in the middle, it wouldn't make any difference at
all. Ever look a how a steel building is bolted together? The
connector at the ends are always shallower than the beam being
connected.
Ron
On Jan 10, 2009, at 4:28 PM, Sabrina wrote:
> <chicago2paris@msn.com>
>
> Now that that is cleared up, does anyone want to talk airplane?
>
> XL Wing Concerns:
>
> First concern I remember having in early 2006 was the size and
> placement of the aileron push rod hole in the rear spar...
>
> I don't think anyone would place that large of a hole (compared to
> the height of the beam) that low in their floor joists...
>
> Comments...
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223918#223918
>
>
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
Jim,
Are you saying that there was no engineering in the design of the 601XL?? The guy
that designed the XL is a dedicated aeronautical engineer who has thousands
of home built airplanes flying.? As far as I know, no home built XL has ever
failed for unknown reasons.? XLs have flown many, many
hours; and if built to the design and flown within the design
parameters, there have been no problems.? It is when the design has not
been followed and the airplane not flown within its intended regime
that problems develop. I know you are a smart guy, but there is no way you can
know everything that went into the engineering and design of the XL.? Smart builders
rely on the "smarts" of the designer and build it the way it was designed.
That's my OPINION and I'm sticking to it. ;>)
Jay in Dallas
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Belcher <z601@anemicaardvark.com>
Sent: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 4:35 pm
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing concerns
This is disturbing. A reason for doing engineering is to find problems before
metal is cut and things are assembled. This design has been in the field for
several years, yet it does not appear this problem has been identified or
resolved.
If drawing 6W10 is to be believed, there is no reason to have the hole quite
this low in the rear spar. Is there, once the metal is assembled, the
potential to reduce the size of the hole?
The real problem would appear to be the configuration of the control horn on
the aileron. It might have been better structurallly to have the horn below
the aileron, and to have a bent pushrod that exited through the lower
aircraft skin. That would have required a slot in the skin, but I believe
this could be done with less structural impact.
That, however, would create slop in the pushrod motion, which is also
undesirable. I don't think the pushrod, as it is presently designed, would
work in this configuration.
I haven't gotten to the point of checking the location of the aileron balance
cable relative to 6B5-1. However, it looks like this part of the design dug a
nice little hole, which the designer(s) then kludged the rest of this part of
the control mechanism to fix.
I also wonder about putting some reinforcement along the bottom of the rear
spar, lapping the hole area. But it would still require moving the hole
upwards some. That 1mm dimension isn't going to cut it in any approach I can
imagine.
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
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
An ejector canopy could come in handy if the pilots do not have the skill to bring
the aircraft down without injury. (At least three pilots have done it with
the canopy unlatched.) So too, there are several reports of the XL flying
well once a canopy departs, it appears to rise up and over the aircraft without
damage.
Even as is, the stay-open canopy would make it easier to get out with an emergency
chute if a control/flying surface is ever flown/leveraged off the craft.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223931#223931
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
On Saturday 10 January 2009 17:23, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
> Jim,
>
> Are you saying that there was no engineering in the design of the 601XL??
> The guy that designed the XL is a dedicated aeronautical engineer who has
> thousands of home built airplanes flying.? As far as I know, no home built
> XL has ever failed for unknown reasons.? XLs have flown many, many hours;
> and if built to the design and flown within the design
> parameters, there have been no problems.? It is when the design has not
> been followed and the airplane not flown within its intended regime
> that problems develop. I know you are a smart guy, but there is no way you
> can know everything that went into the engineering and design of the XL.?
> Smart builders rely on the "smarts" of the designer and build it the way it
> was designed.
>
> That's my OPINION and I'm sticking to it. ;>)
I do think the guy is a smart engineer, but I think even smart engineers can
have oversights. I also know how easy it is to get something into a design,
and keep changing other things later to acommodate an earlier decision.
I'm not saying this is the cause of any failures. I'm saying this particular
thing isn't very good design, no matter who did it. All of us make mistakes;
Chris Heinz is no exception. I have a lot of confidence in the overall
design, but that doesn't mean everything is perfect.
--
=============================================
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 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
Sabrina,
I thoroughly resent the implication that I crashed because of a lack of skill when
the canopy of the airplane I was flying came open.? The other pilot in the
airplane was a CFII.? Surely he didn't lack adequate skill.? I firmly believe
that our combined skill is the very reason that we are both alive today. You
were not in that cockpit and have absolutely no basis for your crass comment and,
again, I thoroughly resent it.
You are definitely now on my sh..it list ! !
Jay in Dallas
-----Original Message-----
From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Sent: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 5:23 pm
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy
An ejector canopy could come in handy if the pilots do not have the skill to
bring the aircraft down without injury. (At least three pilots have done it
with the canopy unlatched.) So too, there are several reports of the XL flying
well once a canopy departs, it appears to rise up and over the aircraft without
damage.
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
OK folks, lets play nice.
I think there is no way anyone can be sure the problems experienced
with XLs had anything to do with the pilot's skill (except for the
new Sport Pilot who departed the airport, and shortly thereafter the
world, in IMC).
Similarly, I can tell you that even the best engineers make
mistakes. What makes a world class engineer different from the
average ones is a thorough review of everything several times to
catch those initial mistakes before anyone else sees them. Even then
the designs are tested using independent methods to confirm the last
mistakes have been eliminated.
Even though I feel I am a bit out of place myself for saying so, I
still think we are starting to get a little too personal in our
comments about the skills of pilots and engineers.
Paul
XL getting close
do not archive
At 03:48 PM 1/10/2009, you wrote:
>I thoroughly resent the implication that I crashed because of a lack
>of skill when the canopy of the airplane I was flying came
>open. The other pilot in the airplane was a CFII. Surely he didn't
>lack adequate skill.
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
It is when the design has not been followed and the airplane not flown within its
intended regime that problems develop.
I thoroughly resent the implication that I crashed because of a lack of skill when
the canopy of the airplane I was flying came open.
This was just sent to me
I noticed that the right hand canopy latch had come loose and the rail was up about
2 inches. I pointed it out to Dennis. We were in sight of a private airfield,
but Dennis decided he was going to re-latch it - in the air! In doing so,
the latch on my side came loose and the canopy immediately shot up to about 50
deg., and the nose went down about 60 deg. I immediately pulled the power completely
off.
I am sorry Jay, but I dont see how opening a canopy in flight near an airport rather
than landing immediately is a design flaw. As much as I would like to blame
it on the AMD POH, I dont see anywhere where it calls for power completely
off in that high drag situation.
Please reconsider placing me on your special list.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223944#223944
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: XL wing concerns |
If I recall correctly from back then, others were adding a doubler about 18
" long to the spar to attempt to compensate for the poor location of the pa
ssthrough.
David L. Downey Harleysville-(SE) PA, USA
--- On Sat, 1/10/09, Jim Belcher <z601@anemicaardvark.com> wrote:
From: Jim Belcher <z601@anemicaardvark.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: XL wing concerns
<z601@anemicaardvark.com>
On Saturday 10 January 2009 15:28, Sabrina wrote:
> Now that that is cleared up, does anyone want to talk airplane?
I think the problem is more postponed than cleared up, but we can hope.
> XL Wing Concerns:
>
> First concern I remember having in early 2006 was the size and placement
of
> the aileron push rod hole in the rear spar...
>
> I don't think anyone would place that large of a hole (compared to the
> height of the beam) that low in their floor joists...
>
> Comments...
Drawing 6W7, dated 01/08, shows a 38mm (dia) hole at station 1995, centered
20mm from the rear spar edge. Unless somebody has changed the rules of math
,
half of 38mm is 19mm, which would leave 1mm of rear spar material at the
bottom.
I find myself somewhat unwilling to cut a hole of this dimension at that
location. I wonder if anyone actually did this....
--
====================
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
=======================
=0A=0A=0A
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
As far as I know, every successful landing made after this type of
canopy came open in flight was accomplished by using a high power
setting all the way to the touchdown. It seems that pulling the power
to idle and leaving it there is not a successful strategy for
recovering from this situation. You need the prop wash over the tail
in order to get enough elevator authority to get the nose up.
This is more a matter of knowing how to recover from the situation
before it happens (or having enough time to figure it out when it
does) than it is a matter of skill.
On Jan 10, 2009, at 6:48 PM, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
>
> I thoroughly resent the implication that I crashed because of a lack
> of skill when the canopy of the airplane I was flying came open.
> The other pilot in the airplane was a CFII. Surely he didn't lack
> adequate skill. I firmly believe that our combined skill is the
> very reason that we are both alive today. You were not in that
> cockpit and have absolutely no basis for your crass comment and,
> again, I thoroughly resent it.
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
Paul, all...
What do you think about an XL canopy that can be ejected?
Is it needed?
The mod costs less than $40 (two MS17985-414 quick release pins and one foot of
4130 square tubing) but the pair of goggles needed, just in case, cost about
$30 each for a total of $100 and 14 ounces of added weight, total.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223955#223955
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
Bryan,
Monday morning quarterbacking is great!? At about pattern altitude, canopy pops
fully open, nose goes down 60+ degrees, 100 mph & increasing, headset ripped
off your head, cruise power,.? What would you do?
I think I've had about enough of this forum.
Jay in Dallas
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Sent: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 7:21 pm
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy
?
As far as I know, every successful landing made after this type of canopy came
open in flight was accomplished by using a high power setting all the way to the
touchdown. It seems that pulling the power to idle and leaving it there is
not a successful strategy for recovering from this situation. You need the prop
wash over the tail in order to get enough elevator authority to get the nose
up.?
?
This is more a matter of knowing how to recover from the situation before it happens
(or having enough time to figure it out when it does) than it is a matter
of skill.?
?
On Jan 10, 2009, at 6:48 PM, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:?
?
>?
> I thoroughly resent the implication that I crashed because of a lack > of skill
when the canopy of the airplane I was flying came open. > The other pilot
in the airplane was a CFII. Surely he didn't lack > adequate skill. I firmly
believe that our combined skill is the > very reason that we are both alive today.
You were not in that > cockpit and have absolutely no basis for your crass
comment and, > again, I thoroughly resent it.?
>?
?
--Bryan Martin?
N61BM, CH 601 XL,?
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.?
do not archive.?
?
?
?
?
?
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 08:40:38PM -0500, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
> Monday morning quarterbacking is great!? At about pattern altitude, canopy
> pops fully open, nose goes down 60+ degrees, 100 mph & increasing, headset
> ripped off your head, cruise power,.? What would you do?
*sigh*
People, we need to remember, when disucssing these things, that people we
know and consider friends have been right in the middle of the kinds of
failures we're discussing, and refrain from casting aspersions on the
abilities of folks who have been there and done that.
We can and should learn from others' experiences...but we should not say
we'd have done things differently in the heat of the moment - because
there's just no way to know. Sometimes, what the book says we should do and
what we think we will do as we're sitting in front of the computer don't
correspond to what we actually wind up doing when the canopy comes open.
As for me, I make certain to double check the security of the (in my case,
new-style) canopy latch on both sides before taxi, and again before takeoff,
as a result of Jay's accident. I've also given careful consideration to how
I'll handle that occurrence. Even so, I'm not going to sit here and say that
he screwed up. I suggest none of us are the position to do so.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, AGI http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (KFRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC http://www.tronguy.net/N55ZC.shtml
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
Sabrina and others,
Whilst a good idea in concept the reality I think would not work for the following
reasons:
1 would the canopy miss or take out the fin/ rudder?
2 would you be able to take your hands off the controlls that you are fighting
to pull the lever/ pins?
although more tseting would need to be carried out its not a bad Idea if we can
work out the issues.
Remember 2 things.. there are photos of the XL flying with the canopy open. So
it will fly, given the right combination of factors( without the right combinations
of Airspeed/ throttle/ angle of attack it wont fly and thats a fact ..
So what are these combiations?? sounds like a summer research job for an up and
comming Areo Engineer and test pilot and test plane ?? and if you are not
any of these types, "dont try this at home "
Chris
Sydney
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223970#223970
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
I don't know what I would have done in that situation, I wasn't there.
The proper thing to do in that situation is to apply full throttle and
pull back hard on the stick, but if you don't know that ahead of time
you probably won't have time to figure it out on your own. Would I
have had the presence of mind to think of that at the time? I don't
know.
All you can do is think about what can go wrong ahead of time and
think of what you should do in that situation and then hope to hell
you can remember it all and have time to react when the shit hits the
fan. There are some situations that require a certain amount of time
and/or altitude to recover from. If you don't have one or the other,
the best pilot in the world can't save the day.
On Jan 10, 2009, at 8:40 PM, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
> Bryan,
>
> Monday morning quarterbacking is great! At about pattern altitude,
> canopy pops fully open, nose goes down 60+ degrees, 100 mph &
> increasing, headset ripped off your head, cruise power,. What would
> you do?
>
> I think I've had about enough of this forum.
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
Jay,
-
-- Other than the 60 degree nose down after the canopy opened in flight
, did the aircraft experience any other unusual-flight characteristics, i
e: vibrations, shudder, excess g-forces, etc? Just wondering. Walt in Dayto
n.
--- On Fri, 1/9/09, jaybannist@cs.com <jaybannist@cs.com> wrote:
From: jaybannist@cs.com <jaybannist@cs.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy
Walter,
I had the same thing happen in an AMD 601XLi, except that we were at cruise
speed, about 1500' AGL.- The nose went down 60 deg.- I was able to bre
ak the dive, but could never get the nose up to level.- We hit the ground
about 10 deg nose down.- When I was able to work again on my XL, the fir
st thing I did was to install a canopy safety tether.- Drawing attached.
-The accident airplane had the new 650 style canopy latch.- My airplane
has the old style latches.
Jay in Dallas
-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Carey <careywf@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 7:47 pm
Subject: Zenith601-List: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy
Hi everyone. While browsing the NTSB website today, I saw an accident repor
t (see below) that might be of interest to all aircraft owners that have-
front hinged canopies on the airplanes. This matter was discussed on this s
ite a few months ago and-and there were several suggestion for devices th
at would either lock the canopy down, or prevent it from opening in flight
more than a few inches. It appears that the-shape of the canopy is acting
as a lifting devise (like the wing), causing it to lift into the windstrea
m, resulting in-unacceptable drag and subsequent control problems.-A si
mple locking devide or restraining cable will alleviate this potential prob
lem. Walt in Dayton.---
-
-
-
-
NTSB Identification: WPR09LA075
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, January 06, 2009 in Casa Grande, AZ
Aircraft: Czech Aircraft Works Sport Cruiser, registration: N797BS
Injuries: 1 Uninjured.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors.
Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been
completed.
On January 6, 2009, at 1600 mountain standard time, a Czech Aircraft Works
Sport Cruiser, N797BS, made an emergency off field landing after the cockpi
t canopy popped opened in flight at Casa Grande Municipal Airport, Casa Gra
nde, Arizona. The sport pilot operated the airplane under the provisions of
Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 91. The pilot was not injured,
and the airplane was substantially damaged. Visual meteorological condition
s prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed. The flight originated at Ca
sa Grande about 1600.
The pilot reported to the Safety Board investigator that the canopy popped
open shortly after takeoff, around 500 feet agl. The canopy is hinged in fr
ont of the cockpit and rotates upward when open. The pilot said he tried to
keep the canopy closed with his free hand but the canopy continued to rise
higher and higher. The pilot turned back to the airport and made an off fi
eld landing next to the airport wind sock.
-
End of report.
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
Message 45
| 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: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
Hi Sabrina,
I don't know if I am the Paul you meant in your question, but I will
be glad to try to answer it.
The answer is a great big "It Depends".
I feel the biggest problem with the front hinged canopy is it doesn't
allow you to exit the plane in flight. This is not something you
would really want to do unless the wings fell off or some similar event.
Some sort of canopy release that ejects the canopy in flight might
allow you to have a chance to survive a structural failure. It
probably will kill you anyway, but it might actually give a small
percentage chance of survival. I would prefer to have this feature
for initial flight testing and also wear a parachute for that testing.
On the other hand, the chances of successfully getting out of a
broken plane and coming down with a parachute are so small that it
probably isn't worth the effort. Even in the USAF where they have
fancy ejection seats and automatic parachutes the survival rate for
emergency ejections is around 50%. That is just the survival rate,
not the chances of getting out without a serious injury - which are
just about zero.
So, if you are a teenager who expects to live forever and get
married, have kids, and live happily ever after, then perhaps a
canopy release is justified. On the other hand, if you are a retired
old guy who knows he won't live forever anyway and figures the odds
of a structural failure are almost zero anyway, then it is not
justified. At some point you have to reach the conclusion that you
will certainly die some way or another and a plane crash is one of
the best ways to go.
Of course, that is just my opinion.
Paul
XL getting close
do not archive
At 05:37 PM 1/10/2009, you wrote:
>Paul, all...
>
>What do you think about an XL canopy that can be ejected?
>
>Is it needed?
>
>The mod costs less than $40 (two MS17985-414 quick release pins and
>one foot of 4130 square tubing) but the pair of goggles needed,
>just in case, cost about $30 each for a total of $100 and 14 ounces
>of added weight, total.
Message 46
| 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: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
Paul, I always value your opinion...
I never fly without a parachute, my 150 has ejector doors. The biggest concern
is getting knocked out by the craft itself be it a canopy, strut or tail feathers.
There was a recent NASA report issued on the need for self-deploying parachutes.
Chris, you are correct...
Not only would it be hard to explain why you ejected the canopy and then landed,
but it was one of the hardest parts to build and that fact alone would freeze
my hand as I reached for the pins. Hopefully that would not be the case with
a test pilot or if the engine also failed. I don't believe it can fly with
that much drag with a failed engine.
This brings up the POH. Normally, when you have an emergency landing, every POH
I have seen tells you to release the canopy or doors at some point just before
landing/crashing. My POH does not recommend releasing the canopy because
if it pops up, the aircraft could become uncontrollable without thrust.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223982#223982
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/9_137.jpg
Message 47
| 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: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
...you had better be pretty sure that it will clear the horizontal and vert
ical stabs once jetisoned...
David L. Downey Harleysville-(SE) PA, USA
--- On Sat, 1/10/09, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy
<chicago2paris@msn.com>
Paul, all...
What do you think about an XL canopy that can be ejected?
Is it needed?
The mod costs less than $40 (two MS17985-414 quick release pins and one fo
ot
of 4130 square tubing) but the pair of goggles needed, just in case, cost
about
$30 each for a total of $100 and 14 ounces of added weight, total.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223955#223955
=0A=0A=0A
Message 48
| 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: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy |
OK 2 things
1. by all means release the canopy prior to impact in an out landing BUT ONLY
IF YOU HAVE A STRAP/ROPE STOPPING IT FROM RISING.
Jay has a great design.. our XLs in Australia all have to have such a strap/ rope
with sailing clete preventing it from rising more than 2 inches.. also helps
to close the canopy when sitting in the plane, also a wind stopper with the
canopy open on the ground.
2 the canopy is so thin that it can be broken with the hand, head if you have crashed.
Make sure you are strapped in and your head set does not come close to
the roof when in flight and in turbulence. (dont ask)
I will add that due to Jays experience with the canopy open we have all become
more aware now of what to do if it ever comes open on me. I owe you a beer for
the newfound knowledge. Now for the person who had the canopy open and flying
pictures, can he post the airspeed/ power settings?? AMD XL POH as 60 knots
and about 1 foot raised how did they come up with this did they test this?
why re invent the wheel if this is a tested statement??
Chris
Sydney
I have kept the older canopy latches as my POH says to fly and land not try to
open the other latch.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223991#223991
Message 49
| 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: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy. |
Hello Sabrina,
-
I consider that ejectable canopy is a bad idea, I will try to explain it as
short as possible,-- The ejected canopy can hit and serious damage, or
destroy the Rudder!-- Even that is plexiglass, has lots of metal parts
in the structure.-
-
Lets remember what happened to the door that-opened/loosed in a 701 recen
tly.-
The airplane almost loosed the stabilator...
-
All airplanes needs the empenage to keep them flying... At least the ZAC on
es, I know Rogalos and Paraglaiders dont :-)- :-)
-
One thing I consider very important is Check List(s) in all airplanes,- (
I remember) from simple Hang Gliders (Are you hooked?), -to the Space Shu
ttle pilots,- WE MUST go though-all of them, not just by memory.
My Instructor was very Serious about this! (and with everything he teached
me).
-
In all-airplanes that have canopies, doors, windows that can open (C-152
for example), baggage compartment lids, etc.- A very important point is t
hat the pilot in command (Us) make sure that they are ALL perfectly closed
before take off...-
-
In my 701, everytime I have a passenger I double check that his seat belt i
s buckled and adjusted and the door latch is completly closed. I plan to do
the same every take off with the 601 XL's canopy latch... (hope this year)
.
-
Just my personal point of view.-
-
Saludos
Gary Gower.
A-Old Pilot friend of mine-told me when I just had my Pilot Licence:-
"Fly every time the same as if your Instructor was in your right seat".
--- On Sat, 1/10/09, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy
<chicago2paris@msn.com>
Paul, all...
What do you think about an XL canopy that can be ejected?
Is it needed?
The mod costs less than $40 (two MS17985-414 quick release pins and one fo
ot
of 4130 square tubing) but the pair of goggles needed, just in case, cost
about
$30 each for a total of $100 and 14 ounces of added weight, total.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=223955#223955
=0A=0A=0A
Message 50
| 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: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy. |
Hello Jay M.
-
Just a very short comment: You are right,- Jay B and Pilot did the best t
hing, they managed to land and are alive...-
-
One thing very important for ALL of us is to try to keep calm in any type o
f personal emergency situation...- if Fear and Desparation are winning, C
lear Mind is loosing...
Easy to-say but hard to do in "that" moment.
-
Jay B.- Thank you very much for your experience, hope all of us learn som
ething from this list that can help us in the future to come.-
-
Saludos
Gary Gower
I remeber an old local saying with motorcycles:- "Only the ones that dont
ride, will not-fall..." (translated from Spanish).
Keep safe, but not too much to not enjoy life... :-)
--- On Sat, 1/10/09, Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com> wrote:
From: Jay Maynard <jmaynard@conmicro.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: In-flight opening of front hinged canopy
<jmaynard@conmicro.com>
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 08:40:38PM -0500, jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
> Monday morning quarterbacking is great!? At about pattern altitude, canop
y
> pops fully open, nose goes down 60+ degrees, 100 mph & increasing,
headset
> ripped off your head, cruise power,.? What would you do?
*sigh*
People, we need to remember, when disucssing these things, that people we
know and consider friends have been right in the middle of the kinds of
failures we're discussing, and refrain from casting aspersions on the
abilities of folks who have been there and done that.
We can and should learn from others' experiences...but we should not say
we'd have done things differently in the heat of the moment - because
there's just no way to know. Sometimes, what the book says we should do and
what we think we will do as we're sitting in front of the computer
don't
correspond to what we actually wind up doing when the canopy comes open.
As for me, I make certain to double check the security of the (in my case,
new-style) canopy latch on both sides before taxi, and again before takeoff
,
as a result of Jay's accident. I've also given careful consideration to
how
I'll handle that occurrence. Even so, I'm not going to sit here and say
that
he screwed up. I suggest none of us are the position to do so.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC, PP-ASEL, AGI http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (KFRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC http://www.tronguy.net/N55ZC.shtml
=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! --
|