Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:23 AM - Re: 601 Down (Iberplanes IGD - Alberto Martin)
2. 06:36 AM - Re: Re: Oshkosh (ella)
3. 08:59 AM - Re: Re: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. (Bryan Martin)
4. 09:30 AM - Re: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. (Sabrina)
5. 05:18 PM - Re: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. (Tim Juhl)
6. 07:22 PM - Re: 601 Down (Bill Lanman)
7. 10:03 PM - Re: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. (Ron Lendon)
8. 10:38 PM - Re: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. (Sabrina)
9. 11:37 PM - Re: Re: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
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 |
|
Apparently it is an HDS
2010/7/30 <BobbyPaulk@comcast.net>
> Does anyone have info on the 601 XL down in the north west.
>
>
> http://www.kirotv.com/news/24441223/detail.html
>
>
> *
>
===========
>
===========
===========
===========
>
> *
>
>
--
Alberto Martin
www.iberplanes.es
Igualada - Barcelona - Spain
----------------------------------------------
Zodiac 601 XL Builder
Serial: 6-7011
Tail Kit: Finished
Wings: Not Started
Fuselage: Started
Engine: Jabiru 3300
Un ingles a Tom Lucero en la guerra de Malvinas: "=A1Piloto argentino mejor
aqu=ED con nosotros en camilla. Muy peligroso arriba, en su avi=F3n!=97".
Un pasaje del libro "Dios y Los Halcones" del Com. Pablo M. Carballo
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 |
|
Have you posted any photos of your modification to the plane?
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 4:57 PM
Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: Oshkosh
>
> The 1200 number was floating out there well before Paul posted it...
>
> And, as you well know, my FAA types at Oshkosh are not the engineers but
> rather the lawyers, PR types and brass who are trying to keep me alive
> through all this. I count them as my friends and mentors.
>
> www.tc.faa.gov/oshkosh Click "Sabrina"
>
> I have been invited to Edwards Air Force Base in two weeks time to talk to
> some engineers about our issue and check out some of their work as well...
>
> Between the Friday meeting, the Edwards meeting and a follow up meeting in
> Burlington, I should have enough information to determine if I will remove
> my struts and de-rate or install fairings on my struts. They were
> designed to be removed or reinstalled in a minute's time.
>
> CH is the one who should be putting his signature on documents, like a 10
> percent refund check on my kit since he only delivered 90% of the gross
> weight he sold to me.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=306715#306715
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. |
I know mine can, I have personally flown it at full a gross weight of 1320 lbs
to a four G flight loading. The VNE I was given during my construction was 180
mph. I have flown it to 110% of that in phase 1 testing to verify that VNE. After
my phase 1 testing was complete and flying it a total of 325 hours, I am
confident that my airplane is safe to fly as designed. And don't forget, the factory
demonstrator probably went through more testing than mine and it flew for
1300 hours before the upgrade was done on it with no signs of failure.
On Jul 29, 2010, at 4:37 PM, Sabrina wrote:
>
>
> Steve, do you believe the kit, factory XL or plans without the modification can
support more than 1200 pounds? Faster than 138? Utility category?
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. |
Thank you.
Let's see if this list is capable of having a normal discussion among friends.
How many of you out there are still flying an XL at 1320 without any modifications?
How many of you would welcome a de-rate to 1200/N/140 if that meant you did not
have to modify your airplane?
Does anyone have a VNE listed on their XL plans other than 180 or 160?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=306960#306960
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: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. |
I too attended the Oshkosh Zenith Forum - I didn't expect a "mea culpa" from the
Heintz clan inasmuch as their legal troubles are far from over. Personally,
I appreciate the fact that they just didn't walk away from the whole mess and
leave us holding the bag. This whole saga with the XL has been a nightmare for
them, both personally and professionally. At this point little can be gained
by pointing fingers... CH obviously did not set out to design an airplane with
a flaw that would kill people, but not being an engineer, I cannot challenge
him on his design. I also don't have faith in our FAA to always find the correct
answer. I have dealt with some FAA engineers that didn't seem to have a
clue. In the case of the Zodiac, I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between
the Zenith and FAA positions.
I am not convinced that the crashes were due to a single factor and nothing I've
read or heard says otherwise. I think the modifications will produce an airplane
that we can be confident in. I appreciate Paul sharing with us what he
heard from the FAA guy... the more good news the better.
A few more things that came out of that forum that may be of interest.
1.) Zenith believes a lot of builders are not properly calibrating their airspeed
indicators with the result that when they slow to maneuvering speed in turbulence
they may actually be flying at a speed significantly greater. I don't
have to explain to anyone what this means.
2.) They gave their justification for the internal aileron stop - explaining there
were suspected instances where passengers had pushed against the stick when
getting out of the airplane and stretched the whole control system. They also
reported a case where failure to secure the stick in windy conditions had resulted
in damage that reduced the cable tension and actually damaged the rear
spar.
3.) Matieu mentioned that Zenith hired an experienced test pilot to take the modified
Zodiac up and "take it to the edge." Apparently there were no problems
and the pilot reported favorably on the flying characteristics of the airplane.
4.) Zodiac intends to have a modified Zodiac put through the same series of flutter
tests by the german engineers that did the original tests last year.
5.) Some pilots who have modified and are now flying their aircraft were asked
to comment on any differences they noted. Their only comment is that the airplane
seemed more stable and seemed to handle turbulence better.
6.) Matieu commented that the reason there has been no new information coming out
from Zenith on the XL is that there is nothing new to report. He seemed to
think this was a good thing - "no news is good news." I think the next chapter
is going to be written by those flying modified aircraft, not the Zenith company.
As for me, I had a great time at Sploshkosh and especially enjoyed the chance to
meet other builders face to face. Paul, I wish I had known you were at the
forum. It would have been nice to meet you finally.
Tim Juhl
--------
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Jabiru 3300A
Tearing wings apart for modification
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=306988#306988
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 |
|
The Pierce County Sheriff's Department says neighbors reported seeing it do
a barrel roll before going down in the area of 260th Street East and 150th
Avenue East.
Bill Lanman
Zodiac CH 650
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: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. |
Sabrina wrote:
> Check out page 3, paragraph 1 of this document:
>
> http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/light_sport/media/Zodiac.pdf
Sabrina,
I have had the experience of upgrading a Czech XL and must report it's not using
the thicker materials that my plans (dated August, 8, 2005) indicate. The page
you cite has the Czech Republic airplane as support for the FAA's conclusion.
The problem there is Apples and Oranges are being used to present conclusions
representative of the other product.
The European airplanes are using lighter thickness materials and are designed to
a different standard GW.
The upgrade of the Czech airplane discovered .040" was used for the 6-B-13-1 Wing
Attachment Uprights. My plans require .063 for the same part and the upgrade
makes the forward parts .125" now. I replace the .040" in the Czech airplane
with .063" for the rear parts.
That is just one area, there are more, that this Czech airplane varies from the
plans I have.
Just thought you would want to know this.
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=307017#307017
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: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. |
Thank you Ron. It is great to have the list back to normal.
Have you find any difference in material thickness in the main spar?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=307018#307018
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: Report from OSH on 601xl update issues. |
The wing attach uprights in the US 601xl's also used .040 for the uprights
in the early versions. I have come across 2 so far and Zenith has supplied
me with the .063 uprights to replace them.
Another Czech 601 that I am doing now in my opinion is better built than
the US 601's. It has most of the upgrades in it already and a few more. The
one I am doing already has the aileron stop installed but is much better
that the light weight one zenith supplied and the floor/seat stiffeners were
installed.
Jeff
In a message dated 8/1/2010 1:04:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
ron.lendon@gmail.com writes:
--> Zenith601-List message posted by: "Ron Lendon" <ron.lendon@gmail.com>
Sabrina wrote:
> Check out page 3, paragraph 1 of this document:
>
> http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/light_sport/media/Zodiac.pdf
Sabrina,
I have had the experience of upgrading a Czech XL and must report it's not
using the thicker materials that my plans (dated August, 8, 2005)
indicate. The page you cite has the Czech Republic airplane as support for the
FAA's conclusion. The problem there is Apples and Oranges are being used to
present conclusions representative of the other product.
The European airplanes are using lighter thickness materials and are
designed to a different standard GW.
The upgrade of the Czech airplane discovered .040" was used for the
6-B-13-1 Wing Attachment Uprights. My plans require .063 for the same part and
the upgrade makes the forward parts .125" now. I replace the .040" in the
Czech airplane with .063" for the rear parts.
That is just one area, there are more, that this Czech airplane varies
from the plans I have.
Just thought you would want to know this.
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=307017#307017
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! --
|