Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:05 AM - Re: Re: 601 down... (Afterfxllc@aol.com)
2. 08:16 AM - Re: Re: 601 down... (Paul Mulwitz)
3. 09:58 AM - Re: Re: 601 down... (fritz)
4. 03:41 PM - Re: Re: 601 down... (Paul Mulwitz)
5. 03:41 PM - Re: Re: 601 down... (Peter Chapman)
6. 04:42 PM - Re: Re: 601 down... (fritz)
7. 05:37 PM - Re: Re: 601 down... (Paul Mulwitz)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I was taught not to throw stones in a glass house but you must be all out
of stones and wonder why it is so breezy inside.
Jeff
In a message dated 4/13/2012 11:56:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
psm@att.net writes:
XL builders included a bunch of idiots
that were causing the wings to regularly fall off
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 |
|
Jeff,
I'm sorry you didn't get my irony. The point was my BS detectors were
going off as soon as the Heintz clan decided to blame builders and
owners for the XL failures. I wasn't sure of the cause until long after
the FAA guys announced they had found it, but I couldn't help notice
that it was only XL builders of Zodiacs who were causing failures and
not those who built earlier models. The Heintzs were so cocksure the
design was OK they wouldn't even try to find the problem.
One thing I haven't yet mentioned on the email list. I spent a couple
of years traveling around the country talking to various experts over
the XL issue. I was surprised to learn the kit plane industry has a
long history of horrible design problems. I guess we take for granted
that anyone offering kits has a competent design built into them. Even
after vetting a design through the experts at EAA and studying the
accident history of a popular design such as the Zodiac I still wound up
with a turkey. It could have been worse. I learned from an NTSB guy at
Oshkosh that Jim Bede had a long history if disappointing his many
customers. In the BD-5 case he refused to send out the final kit part,
the engine cowl, to any of this customers because he knew many of them
would get killed if they got to fly their planes. If they made their
own cowl and then killed themselves they couldn't blame Bede. At least
in the XL case the problems were eventually identified and apparently
fixed with the AMD update. Now we have a sound design for our planes.
Besides, I live on a mountain composed primarily of rock. I will never
run out of stones to throw. The only breeze in my house comes from the
heat pump.
Best regards,
Paul
On 4/14/2012 6:04 AM, Afterfxllc@aol.com wrote:
> I was taught not to throw stones in a glass house but you must be all
> out of stones and wonder why it is so breezy inside.
> Jeff
> In a message dated 4/13/2012 11:56:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> psm@att.net writes:
>
> XL builders included a bunch of idiots
> that were causing the wings to regularly fall off
>
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
Paul-- please clarify--- you say 2 different things.
1) "XL builders included a bunch of idiots
that were causing the wings to regularly fall off".
2) "At least in the XL case the problems were eventually identified and
apparently fixed with the AMD update"
Which is it???????
Your first statement was "rather harsh" considering folks died.
Fritz.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm@att.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2012 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: 601 down...
> Jeff,
>
> I'm sorry you didn't get my irony. The point was my BS detectors were
> going off as soon as the Heintz clan decided to blame builders and
> owners for the XL failures. I wasn't sure of the cause until long after
> the FAA guys announced they had found it, but I couldn't help notice
> that it was only XL builders of Zodiacs who were causing failures and
> not those who built earlier models. The Heintzs were so cocksure the
> design was OK they wouldn't even try to find the problem.
>
> One thing I haven't yet mentioned on the email list. I spent a couple
> of years traveling around the country talking to various experts over
> the XL issue. I was surprised to learn the kit plane industry has a
> long history of horrible design problems. I guess we take for granted
> that anyone offering kits has a competent design built into them. Even
> after vetting a design through the experts at EAA and studying the
> accident history of a popular design such as the Zodiac I still wound up
> with a turkey. It could have been worse. I learned from an NTSB guy at
> Oshkosh that Jim Bede had a long history if disappointing his many
> customers. In the BD-5 case he refused to send out the final kit part,
> the engine cowl, to any of this customers because he knew many of them
> would get killed if they got to fly their planes. If they made their
> own cowl and then killed themselves they couldn't blame Bede. At least
> in the XL case the problems were eventually identified and apparently
> fixed with the AMD update. Now we have a sound design for our planes.
>
> Besides, I live on a mountain composed primarily of rock. I will never
> run out of stones to throw. The only breeze in my house comes from the
> heat pump.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Paul
>
> On 4/14/2012 6:04 AM, Afterfxllc@aol.com wrote:
>> I was taught not to throw stones in a glass house but you must be all
>> out of stones and wonder why it is so breezy inside.
>> Jeff
>> In a message dated 4/13/2012 11:56:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> psm@att.net writes:
>>
>> XL builders included a bunch of idiots
>> that were causing the wings to regularly fall off
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
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 |
|
Hi Fritz,
Comment #1 was me "Aping" what the Heintz clan was saying for several
years. In effect they refused to believe there was anything wrong with
the design and the deaths were all caused by maintenance issues (i.e.
loose aileron cables) and similar such builder faults. I never believed
that.
Comment #2 Reflects my current opinion. It also reflects the opinions
of the engineers in the FAA Small Airplane Directorate as documented in
their SAIB: CE-10-08 dated November 7, 2009 which effectively grounded
the entire fleet of Zodiac XLs until they had the AMD update installed.
I believe the designation for CH601XL and CH650 from Zenith Aircraft
Company changes the names to CH601XLB and CH650B when the update is
included and installed. This update adds a considerable amount of metal
and rivets to the wing spars and spar carry-through and also adds mass
balancing weights to the ailerons. Other changes are also included such
as reinforcements for the wing attach uprights.
I was not convinced the update actually fixed the problem after reading
the various FAA documents. I thought the conclusion was that there
might be a problem and the update strengthens the design which might fix
the problem if there is one. I was turned around on this point of view
by a 20 minute face to face conversation with Wes Ryan (the guy whose
name appears at the bottom of the FAA documents on this whole issue).
He convinced me that they had indeed found serious problems with the
design which were corrected by the update. Apparently I was unable to
interpret their released documents clearly.
So the bottom line, in my opinion, is that Zodiac XLs and 650s are death
traps until the AMD update is installed. After this installation they
have a competent engineering design which should be considered safe.
(Of course they are still home built and/or uncertified airplanes so
there is a bit of danger that remains. This is no different from any
other kit or plans built airplane.)
I hope this helps. Please accept my apology for unclear writing
earlier. I didn't mean to confuse anything or reflect negatively on
anyone who fell victim to this problem.
Paul
Camas, WA
On 4/14/2012 9:57 AM, fritz wrote:
>
> Paul-- please clarify--- you say 2 different things.
>
> 1) "XL builders included a bunch of idiots
> that were causing the wings to regularly fall off".
>
> 2) "At least in the XL case the problems were eventually
> identified and
> apparently fixed with the AMD update"
>
> Which is it???????
>
> Your first statement was "rather harsh" considering folks died.
>
> Fritz.
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 |
|
At 11:15 14-04-12, you wrote:
>. In the BD-5 case he refused to send out the final kit part, the
>engine cowl, to any of this customers because he knew many of them
>would get killed if they got to fly their planes.
I don't want to go too far off on a tangent, but the whole story is a
lot more complex (and I only know a bit). It was the whole damn
engine that ended up not being available to kit customers; it wasn't
some trick to avoid liability. And that aircraft was in a whole other
class, a hot little plane with minimal structure around the pilot,
one that would be very unforgiving if one's own engine installation
didn't work out right. And hotter still if the engines actually
installed weighed a lot more (in a light fuselage) than Bede had
initially hoped, which usually was the case.
I'm sure that there were some poorly designed plans or kit built
aircraft out there that never got popular, but the XL was unusual for
being reasonably popular yet having catastrophic structural failures.
Peter Chapman
Toronto, ON 601 HDS / 912 / C-GZDC
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 |
|
I have an idea what the updates consist of and thought these would make the
airplane safer.
But, what was the specific cause you talk about? Was it one major flaw or
was it a combination of what the updates cover. Were any of the updates
"just in case" ? ie aileron balance system. Elevator travel restriction??
Does the 7 -9 degree (?) slant of the wing spar contribute to the problem vs
being 90 degrees ??
Was the whole wing design and the way it attached a problem?
Fritz
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm@att.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2012 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: 601 down...
>
> Hi Fritz,
>
> Comment #1 was me "Aping" what the Heintz clan was saying for several
> years. In effect they refused to believe there was anything wrong with
> the design and the deaths were all caused by maintenance issues (i.e.
> loose aileron cables) and similar such builder faults. I never believed
> that.
>
> Comment #2 Reflects my current opinion. It also reflects the opinions of
> the engineers in the FAA Small Airplane Directorate as documented in their
> SAIB: CE-10-08 dated November 7, 2009 which effectively grounded the
> entire fleet of Zodiac XLs until they had the AMD update installed. I
> believe the designation for CH601XL and CH650 from Zenith Aircraft Company
> changes the names to CH601XLB and CH650B when the update is included and
> installed. This update adds a considerable amount of metal and rivets to
> the wing spars and spar carry-through and also adds mass balancing weights
> to the ailerons. Other changes are also included such as reinforcements
> for the wing attach uprights.
>
> I was not convinced the update actually fixed the problem after reading
> the various FAA documents. I thought the conclusion was that there might
> be a problem and the update strengthens the design which might fix the
> problem if there is one. I was turned around on this point of view by a
> 20 minute face to face conversation with Wes Ryan (the guy whose name
> appears at the bottom of the FAA documents on this whole issue). He
> convinced me that they had indeed found serious problems with the design
> which were corrected by the update. Apparently I was unable to interpret
> their released documents clearly.
>
> So the bottom line, in my opinion, is that Zodiac XLs and 650s are death
> traps until the AMD update is installed. After this installation they
> have a competent engineering design which should be considered safe. (Of
> course they are still home built and/or uncertified airplanes so there is
> a bit of danger that remains. This is no different from any other kit or
> plans built airplane.)
>
> I hope this helps. Please accept my apology for unclear writing earlier.
> I didn't mean to confuse anything or reflect negatively on anyone who fell
> victim to this problem.
>
> Paul
> Camas, WA
>
> On 4/14/2012 9:57 AM, fritz wrote:
>>
>> Paul-- please clarify--- you say 2 different things.
>>
>> 1) "XL builders included a bunch of idiots
>> that were causing the wings to regularly fall off".
>>
>> 2) "At least in the XL case the problems were eventually identified
>> and
>> apparently fixed with the AMD update"
>>
>> Which is it???????
>>
>> Your first statement was "rather harsh" considering folks died.
>>
>> Fritz.
>
>
>
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 |
|
Hi Fritz,
I don't know the answers to all your questions. I am a retired engineer
but not an aviation engineer. I made a living doing electrical
engineering. For specific answers I suspect you should contact the FAA
or Zenith or Zenair. I don't know if any of them will tell you exactly
what the truth is for a variety of reasons. You can't contact AMD
because they sold out shortly after the design update was released.
I was told the FAA and NTSB guys found evidence of flutter and
structural failure in the accident wreckage. They could not determine
if the flutter caused the structure failure or the structure failure
caused the flutter.
There was no change to the elevator travel or anything else related to
the elevator.
Many people who may not rate as experts in the Zodiac accidents claimed
the aileron balance was very important. It was part of the update so it
should be installed in all XLs and 650s. It was developed by the LAA
before the rest of the update was developed by Zenair/AMD.
Nobody I talked to said the tilted spar was related to the problems.
This causes the wing tips to be moved forward - part of the unique
design of the XL. The update did not change this.
Mostly the update added lots of aluminum to the spars. It also added
metal and hard rivets to the spar carry through.
Best regards,
Paul
On 4/14/2012 4:41 PM, fritz wrote:
>
> I have an idea what the updates consist of and thought these would
> make the airplane safer.
>
> But, what was the specific cause you talk about? Was it one major
> flaw or was it a combination of what the updates cover. Were any of
> the updates "just in case" ? ie aileron balance system. Elevator
> travel restriction??
>
> Does the 7 -9 degree (?) slant of the wing spar contribute to the
> problem vs being 90 degrees ??
>
> Was the whole wing design and the way it attached a problem?
>
> Fritz
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm@att.net>
> To: <zenith601-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2012 6:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: 601 down...
>
>
>>
>> Hi Fritz,
>>
>> Comment #1 was me "Aping" what the Heintz clan was saying for several
>> years. In effect they refused to believe there was anything wrong
>> with the design and the deaths were all caused by maintenance issues
>> (i.e. loose aileron cables) and similar such builder faults. I never
>> believed that.
>>
>> Comment #2 Reflects my current opinion. It also reflects the
>> opinions of the engineers in the FAA Small Airplane Directorate as
>> documented in their SAIB: CE-10-08 dated November 7, 2009 which
>> effectively grounded the entire fleet of Zodiac XLs until they had
>> the AMD update installed. I believe the designation for CH601XL and
>> CH650 from Zenith Aircraft Company changes the names to CH601XLB and
>> CH650B when the update is included and installed. This update adds a
>> considerable amount of metal and rivets to the wing spars and spar
>> carry-through and also adds mass balancing weights to the ailerons.
>> Other changes are also included such as reinforcements for the wing
>> attach uprights.
>>
>> I was not convinced the update actually fixed the problem after
>> reading the various FAA documents. I thought the conclusion was that
>> there might be a problem and the update strengthens the design which
>> might fix the problem if there is one. I was turned around on this
>> point of view by a 20 minute face to face conversation with Wes Ryan
>> (the guy whose name appears at the bottom of the FAA documents on
>> this whole issue). He convinced me that they had indeed found
>> serious problems with the design which were corrected by the update.
>> Apparently I was unable to interpret their released documents clearly.
>>
>> So the bottom line, in my opinion, is that Zodiac XLs and 650s are
>> death traps until the AMD update is installed. After this
>> installation they have a competent engineering design which should be
>> considered safe. (Of course they are still home built and/or
>> uncertified airplanes so there is a bit of danger that remains. This
>> is no different from any other kit or plans built airplane.)
>>
>> I hope this helps. Please accept my apology for unclear writing
>> earlier. I didn't mean to confuse anything or reflect negatively on
>> anyone who fell victim to this problem.
>>
>> Paul
>> Camas, WA
>>
>> On 4/14/2012 9:57 AM, fritz wrote:
>>>
>>> Paul-- please clarify--- you say 2 different things.
>>>
>>> 1) "XL builders included a bunch of idiots
>>> that were causing the wings to regularly fall off".
>>>
>>> 2) "At least in the XL case the problems were eventually
>>> identified and
>>> apparently fixed with the AMD update"
>>>
>>> Which is it???????
>>>
>>> Your first statement was "rather harsh" considering folks died.
>>>
>>> Fritz.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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! --
|