Rick, You are right. I don't think that Roger's post was meant as pure
fact but more as satire. I took it with a grain of salt and enjoyed the
reading. There was no reason to flame him!!!!!!!!
Bob Spudis
N701ZX Ch701/912S
In a message dated 11/16/2009 4:52:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
tigerrick@mindspring.com writes:
--> Zenith601-List message posted by: Rick Lindstrom
<tigerrick@mindspring.com>
Guys, this whole thing is getting out of hand, IMHO. I thought Roger's
post, as overly dramatic and format-challenged as it was, still made some good
points. It was most likely written with tongue firmly planted in cheek,
and I took it with a grain of salt or two.
I am really surprised at the venomous response from some here. The FAA and
the NTSB still have not found a single "smoking gun" that's the primary
cause for the in-flight break ups. And yet, it's also not normal for 7 601
series airplanes to suffer catastrophic airframe failures in a very similar
fashion. All we know is that when overstressed (for whatever the reason), a
chain of events starts that causes the airframe to fail in a predictable
fashion. The one thing that we do know is that the airframe is not
fault-tolerant of being overstressed. We also know that the 601 design has racked
up
thousands of flight hours without failure, but this is of little comfort to
the 11 lost souls (and their families), who are forever marred by these
crashes.
So, after all of the dust settles, we'll finally have an airframe that is
more tolerant of airborne stresses and less susceptable to any single event
resulting in catastrophic failure. It won't be irrecoverable anymore if
the controls get mishandled, the aileron cables go slack, someone accidently
steps on a flap, someone overstresses the aileron control system, the
airplane goes a bit too fast or pulls a bit more G's than the design
specifically allows. We'll now have an airplane that will at least allow us to
safely
return to earth under control.
I went back and reread the SAIB from the FAA, which claims the 601 was
marginal in meeting the intent of the ASTM standard. However, the designer has
claimed all along that the 601 is safe provided it's properly flown and
maintained. Between the two schools of thought is a wide area that has been
the subject of hot debate, and we won't get anywhere with one side
demonizing the other.
So let's quit kicking Roger for his thoughts, order and install the
upgrades, and get on with enjoying flying our little beasties as Chris and sons
intended.
(opinion mode off)
Rick Lindstrom
ZenVair 601XL N42KP
-----Original Message-----
>From: Karl Polifka <jfowler120@verizon.net>
>Sent: Nov 16, 2009 3:20 PM
>To: zenith601-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Re: In a galaxy far, far away
>
<jfowler120@verizon.net>
>
>Doug,
>
>You are well over the edge...
