Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:09 AM - Just Three Days Left & Some Very Nice Comments... (Matt Dralle)
1. 12:05 AM - Re: Undercarriage failures (Paul Mulwitz)
2. 01:29 AM - Re: Undercarriage failures (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
3. 05:02 AM - Re: Undercarriage failures (Paul Mulwitz)
4. 09:06 AM - Compass (BobbyPaulk@comcast.net)
5. 09:44 AM - Re: Undercarriage failures (Steve Look)
6. 10:32 AM - Re: compass position (Bryan Martin)
7. 10:54 AM - Re: Undercarriage failures (Bryan Martin)
8. 11:13 AM - Re: Undercarriage failures (Paul Mulwitz)
9. 11:37 AM - Re: Undercarriage failures (Terry Phillips)
10. 04:10 PM - Re: compass position (Jeff)
11. 04:56 PM - Re: Undercarriage failures (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
Message 0
| 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: | Just Three Days Left & Some Very Nice Comments... |
Dear Listers,
There are just three days left in this year's List Fund Raiser. Won't you take
a monment and make a quick Contribution today to support the continued upgrade
and operation of these Forum services.
I've received some more really nice comments from Listers along with their List
Support Contributions, and I've share a few below.
There are some sweet gifts available this year, so browse the selections and pickup
a nice item along with your qualifying Contribution.
Contribution Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Or drop a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
581 Jeannie Way
Livermore CA 94550
USA
Thank you in advance for your generous support! It is very much appreciated!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
-------------------------------------------------------
Great resource, keep it coming...
Marten V.
Thanks for maintaining these essential lists!
Rumen D.
Great Service!
Douglas D.
Thanks for this great service!
Peter T.
Thanks for your enduring support of homebuilding communications!
Daniel M.
You do a great job and provide a valuable service.
Mark B.
It's really a great source I have used a lot.
Robert K.
Reading the RV-10 list is part of my morning routine...
Perry C.
Great job running these lists.
Edward T.
Thanks for doing a tough job.
Mic T.
Your List was such a great resource for me when I built in "98".
Ron V.
Its a very useful forum.
Dave F.
Really enjoy your list...
William D.
Great service,
Gerald T.
The list still is a valuable source of information and there
are many worthwhile postings.
Graham H.
The list has seen me through an RV-9A, RV-10, and now an RV-12.
Albert G.
Thanks for a great resource!
Barry H.
Thank you for maintaining this excellent site.
Bill W.
The Matronics Email list are an invaluable service.
William C.
I appreciate the RV-10 list.
Vijay P.
Thanks for a great list and all of the work you do.
Ian W.
Thanks for keeping up this very useful list.
George R.
The list is excellent and I find it very handy for any problems
I come up against during construction.
Greg W.
The lists are an important part of my day. I've met lots of people
and made lots of friends.
Dave S.
It's really a great source I haved used a lot.
Robert K.
I read the Pietenpol List everyday.
PF B.
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: | Undercarriage failures |
Hi Andrew,
I don't really know what an XL 601B is.
If you are using the light weight Czech gear on a 1320 pound plane then that
might explain the gear failures. I think the European Ultralight planes
have a lower gross weight and the Czech gear was designed for that spec.
In any case going back to the standard aluminum "Spring" gear should solve
your problem.
Paul
XL still doing the upgrade.
From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew
McMenamin
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 10:40 PM
Subject: Zenith601-List: Undercarriage failures
Hi list members
We have recently had both undercarriage legs fail in quick succession. We
have an XL 601B with curved legs, which I understand are made of carbon
fibre covered with fibreglass, and after a firm landing, noted on pre-flight
a week later a 3 mm wide and 250 mm long longitudinal crack down the midline
of the rear aspect of the left leg. We had this replaced, then last week
the other leg gave way after a further firm landing, this time transversely
across the upper leg just below the attachment to the fuselage.
These landings were just typical firm student landings with an instructor
and leg failure was not expected from either.
Has anyone had a similar experience? Any recommendations?
Thanks
Andrew
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: Undercarriage failures |
Paul,
AMD offered that gear as an option on the 601... I have one that came in
for a upgrade and I called Zenith to see if it was changed / illegal or
factory and sure enough it is an option.
Jeff
In a message dated 11/28/2010 3:06:23 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
psm@att.net writes:
Hi Andrew,
I don't really know what an XL 601B is.
If you are using the light weight Czech gear on a 1320 pound plane then
that might explain the gear failures. I think the European Ultralight planes
have a lower gross weight and the Czech gear was designed for that spec.
In any case going back to the standard aluminum "Spring" gear should solve
your problem.
Paul
XL still doing the upgrade.
From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew McMenamin
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 10:40 PM
Subject: Zenith601-List: Undercarriage failures
Hi list members
We have recently had both undercarriage legs fail in quick succession. We
have an XL 601B with curved legs, which I understand are made of carbon
fibre covered with fibreglass, and after a firm landing, noted on pre-flight
a week later a 3 mm wide and 250 mm long longitudinal crack down the
midline of the rear aspect of the left leg. We had this replaced, then last week
the other leg gave way after a further firm landing, this time
transversely across the upper leg just below the attachment to the fuselage.
These landings were just typical firm student landings with an instructor
and leg failure was not expected from either.
Has anyone had a similar experience? Any recommendations?
Thanks
Andrew
www.aeroelectric.com
www.buildersbooks.com
www.homebuilthelp.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List
http://forums.matronics.com
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List)
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: | Undercarriage failures |
Hi Jeff,
I guess that could be an example of the questionable engineering we have
received from Zenith/Zenair/AMD. It makes me all the more appreciative of
the thousands of man-hours the FAA engineers spent reviewing the pre and
post upgrade XL structure.
By the way, I confirmed the fact of all that FAA engineering effort with the
manager of the light plane division - Wes Ryan. I spoke with him while
attending an ASTM F37 committee meeting a few weeks ago in Long Beach, CA.
He absolutely confirmed the facts that FAA engineers literally spent
thousands of man-hours going over the XL design before the upgrade and again
after the upgrade design was created by Zenair. They indeed did pronounce
the pre-upgrade design as deficient and the post-upgrade design as meeting
the appropriate ASTM design requirements.
I think we are very lucky that the XL existed both in S-LSA form and
kit/plans form. If not for the S-LSA, I doubt the FAA would have paid so
much attention to this design - even with the NTSB attention and accident
record. Now we have an apparently competent design for our planes.
Paul
Camas, WA
XL upgrade work in progress.
From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Afterfxllc@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 1:27 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Undercarriage failures
Paul,
AMD offered that gear as an option on the 601... I have one that came in for
a upgrade and I called Zenith to see if it was changed / illegal or factory
and sure enough it is an option.
Jeff
In a message dated 11/28/2010 3:06:23 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
psm@att.net writes:
Hi Andrew,
I don't really know what an XL 601B is.
If you are using the light weight Czech gear on a 1320 pound plane then that
might explain the gear failures. I think the European Ultralight planes
have a lower gross weight and the Czech gear was designed for that spec.
In any case going back to the standard aluminum "Spring" gear should solve
your problem.
Paul
XL still doing the upgrade.
From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew
McMenamin
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 10:40 PM
Subject: Zenith601-List: Undercarriage failures
Hi list members
We have recently had both undercarriage legs fail in quick succession. We
have an XL 601B with curved legs, which I understand are made of carbon
fibre covered with fibreglass, and after a firm landing, noted on pre-flight
a week later a 3 mm wide and 250 mm long longitudinal crack down the midline
of the rear aspect of the left leg. We had this replaced, then last week
the other leg gave way after a further firm landing, this time transversely
across the upper leg just below the attachment to the fuselage.
These landings were just typical firm student landings with an instructor
and leg failure was not expected from either.
Has anyone had a similar experience? Any recommendations?
Thanks
Andrew
www.aeroelectric.com
www.buildersbooks.com
www.homebuilthelp.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List
http://forums.matronics.com
tp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
p://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List
s.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.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 |
|
Chris,
I see you were flying when the compass moved 5 deg. with the stick moving. Try
moving the stick on the ground. The movement you saw may not be magnetic interference.
A compass will move with acceleration and will also when you make a turn
will tend to turn in the opposite direction at first. It will lead and lag
depending on heading ( east is least and west is best.) A southerly heading is
the most steady if you are trying to set one up.
Hope this helps
Bobby
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: | Undercarriage failures |
I thought this pot had been stirred enough. Apparently as long as
Zenith survives or there is something more than scrap value left to
the XL, there is never enough.
Steve
At 06:59 AM 11/28/2010, you wrote:
>
>I guess that could be an example of the questionable engineering ...
Steve Look
Monticello, IL
601XL
"Dogs have owners, Cats have staff"
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: compass position |
I bought an expensive vertical card compass for my Zodiac. I first mounted it in
the panel but could never get it compensated correctly there, I moved it to
the top of the dash and still could not get it compensated. The compass worked
fine when out of the airplane. I finally bought a $10 wet compass from Walmart
and stuck it to the canopy about eight inches above the dash and was able to
zero it in without any trouble. I sold the aircraft compass on e-Bay.
The cheap compass is marked off in 30 degree increments like an aircraft compass
as well as the eight cardinal directions. The rules state that you must have
a magnetic direction indicator in the airplane, nothing in the rules say it
has to be a certified aircraft compass.
On Nov 27, 2010, at 5:33 PM, chris Sinfield wrote:
>
> Advice from users required please
>
> I am about to order the standby compass and was wanting some advice from user's.
I like the dash mounted ones over the pedestal ones and I do have room in
the dash.
>
> When flying the local Sportstar with duel sticks, same config as mine, I see
the dash compass move up to 5 deg when you move the stick. Has anyone seen this
in the XL with the duel stick set up?
>
> what about with the duel stick and pedestal compass any movement on the compass
with stick movement?
>
> I was thinking of the FALCON over the AIRPATH just over cost or is the Falcon
not up to it? I had thought of a boat pedestal compass but the DAR said no..
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=321237#321237
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
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: Undercarriage failures |
I believe the composite gear was designed for the european version. The max gross
weight is lower in the european rules. the composite gear was used to save
weight and allow a greater usable payload but it is probably not as suitable as
the original aluminum gear at the U. S. weight limits.
Two possible solutions to this are either order the original aluminum gear from
Zenith or the lighter but more expensive gear from Grove. Both are stronger than
the composite gear. Some modifications may be needed to the gear channel.
On Nov 28, 2010, at 1:40 AM, Andrew McMenamin wrote:
> Hi list members
>
> We have recently had both undercarriage legs fail in quick succession. We have
an XL 601B with curved legs, which I understand are made of carbon fibre covered
with fibreglass, and after a firm landing, noted on pre-flight a week later
a 3 mm wide and 250 mm long longitudinal crack down the midline of the rear
aspect of the left leg. We had this replaced, then last week the other leg
gave way after a further firm landing, this time transversely across the upper
leg just below the attachment to the fuselage.
>
> These landings were just typical firm student landings with an instructor and
leg failure was not expected from either.
>
> Has anyone had a similar experience? Any recommendations?
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: | Undercarriage failures |
Steve,
Perhaps if you had read the rest of the message instead of just cutting it
off you would reach a more correct conclusion.
I don't know why you want to bitch about Zenith surviving.
The rest of the message should actually help the value of the XL since it
says the new design has actually proven to be a good one after extensive
review by competent engineers rather then the poor one sold to us by
Zenith/Zenair/AMD that wound up suffering a number of in-flight failures.
Or perhaps you are one of the folks who wants to believe there never was a
real problem . . . that all those people died because they didn't keep their
cables at the correct tension?
Just in case you actually read the end of messages as well as the first line
. . . The Upgraded design is a competent one that meets the required ASTM
standards according to the FAA engineers that do the part 23 reviews. This
was not true of the previous design. We all were supposed to get that
message from the FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin issued last
November, but the language was obscure enough that we just didn't understand
what they were trying to say. That was the document that required that ALL
XLs and 650s receive the upgrade before being flown again.
Paul
From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve Look
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 9:43 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith601-List: Undercarriage failures
I thought this pot had been stirred enough. Apparently as long as Zenith
survives or there is something more than scrap value left to the XL, there
is never enough.
Steve
At 06:59 AM 11/28/2010, you wrote:
I guess that could be an example of the questionable engineering ...
Steve Look
Monticello, IL
601XL
"Dogs have owners, Cats have staff"
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: Undercarriage failures |
Hi Andrew
Can you provide us with more information about your 601? It sounds like you
are using it for flight instruction, so, I would assume, that it is a
factory assembled S-LSA. Who built it? AMD, CZAW, someone else? What is
the gross weight limit specified in the POH? I believe that some CZAW
601XL's aircraft were manufactured for the European Ultralight
specification with a maximum allowable gross of 472.5 kg (1042 lb). I know
that Comlet, CZAW's landing gear supplier, markets versions of their gear
for both 472.5 and 600 kg gross (Google Comlet for more info). I have no
idea how one might determine whether the gear on your aircraft is supplied
by Comlet, and, if so, which version you have.
I have no doubt that the standard 601XL gear supplied by Zenair is very
strong. However, the attachments for the composite gear are very different
than for the standard aluminum gear. Switching would be a lot more complex
than just changing the gear. I have seen test data indicating that the
heavier version of the Comlet gear passed European tests on an airplane
rated at 600 kg (1320 lb) gross. It is likely that the gear on the
PiperSport is the heavier version of the Comlet gear.
If you believe that your gear is a Comlet product, I would recommend that
you contact Comlet and try to determine which version of their gear you
have. If you have the gear made for the European Ultralight you might look
into buying the heavier version. Hopefully, the attachment brackets fit
both versions.
If you do decide to purchase the heavier gear, I would consider ordering a
pair for my 601XL at the same time and we could split the trans-Atlantic
shipping costs. Let me know.
Good luck.
Terry
At 07:40 PM 11/28/2010 +1300, you wrote:
>Hi list members
>
>We have recently had both undercarriage legs fail in quick succession. We
>have an XL 601B with curved legs, which I understand are made of carbon
>fibre covered with fibreglass, and after a firm landing, noted on
>pre-flight a week later a 3 mm wide and 250 mm long longitudinal crack
>down the midline of the rear aspect of the left leg. We had this
>replaced, then last week the other leg gave way after a further firm
>landing, this time transversely across the upper leg just below the
>attachment to the fuselage.
>
>These landings were just typical firm student landings with an instructor
>and leg failure was not expected from either.
>
>Has anyone had a similar experience? Any recommendations?
>
>Thanks
>
>Andrew
Terry Phillips
ttp44~at~rkymtn.net
Corvallis MT
ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail & flaps are done;
Upgrading wings & ailerons per the AMD Safety Directive
http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/
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: | compass position |
Bryon,
While that may not be any rule, the FAA Inspector and/or DAR deciding on
issuing an Airworthiness Certificate or not has the discretion to accept or
reject what they feel is necessary. Results may and do vary.
Jeff D
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bryan Martin
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: compass position
<bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
I bought an expensive vertical card compass for my Zodiac. I first mounted
it in the panel but could never get it compensated correctly there, I moved
it to the top of the dash and still could not get it compensated. The
compass worked fine when out of the airplane. I finally bought a $10 wet
compass from Walmart and stuck it to the canopy about eight inches above the
dash and was able to zero it in without any trouble. I sold the aircraft
compass on e-Bay. Do not archive
The cheap compass is marked off in 30 degree increments like an aircraft
compass as well as the eight cardinal directions. The rules state that you
must have a magnetic direction indicator in the airplane, nothing in the
rules say it has to be a certified aircraft compass.
On Nov 27, 2010, at 5:33 PM, chris Sinfield wrote:
<chris_sinfield@yahoo.com.au>
>
> Advice from users required please
>
> I am about to order the standby compass and was wanting some advice from
user's. I like the dash mounted ones over the pedestal ones and I do have
room in the dash.
>
> When flying the local Sportstar with duel sticks, same config as mine, I
see the dash compass move up to 5 deg when you move the stick. Has anyone
seen this in the XL with the duel stick set up?
>
> what about with the duel stick and pedestal compass any movement on the
compass with stick movement?
>
> I was thinking of the FALCON over the AIRPATH just over cost or is the
Falcon not up to it? I had thought of a boat pedestal compass but the DAR
said no..
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=321237#321237
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: Undercarriage failures |
The gear in question is Grove gear. And Zenith isn't at fault because
someone elses gear failed.
Jeff
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! --
|