On 2008-07-28, Victor Bravo <dirdev@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> I'm holding up my end of an argument, against three or four people who
> are being equally snotty. I would be delighted to raise the level of
> this "discussion" up to a more genteel level, but it would require the
> same commitment from others... who immediately came after me with both
> barrels right out of the gate.
Put yourself in my position.
You make comments about an airplane on which I just spent a large sum of
money and invested a lot of personal emotion into, using your experience
with one part of the aircraft to "explain" that another, completely
unrelated part of the aircraft that's been implicated in accidents is
somehow underdesigned, yet not backing up your comments beyond that - and
especially when my experience with your complaint on my aircraft turns out
to be quite different?
Just what kind of a reaction were you expecting?
> 4. There have been now SEVERAL 601XL in-flight wing failures, one or
> two new ones since I made the comment that started this flame-fest. If
> my big mouth keeps a couple of people from burying their heads in the
> sand on this issue, then perhaps there is some good being done.
Nobody I know of in the Zodiac community is burying their head in the
sand.
With a couple of exceptions, nobody's running around in Chicken Little
mode,
either. We're watching the situation and doing what we can to minimize the
risks inherent in flying, just as any prudent pilot would do.
One of the Heintz brothers (I think it was Mathieu, but I could be
misremembering) has said that there is no one common factor among the
accidents that are under investigation. Since he's involved in the
investigation, he can't say any more than that until the NTSB has released
its findings.
> 6. I own a CH-701 mini-project (plans and a few tail parts built), and
> I would love to build it and fly it. I am a very strong sup****ter of
> Chris Heintz' designs for the most part. He has done something
> brilliant, made the airplanes easy to build, and extremely simple.
Great! Build it and fly it! Even if your scaremongering about the 601XL
were
on target, that would not apply to the 701 - as that's a different
aircraft,
with a different flight profile, and a safety record even you shouldn't be
able to find fault with.
> 8. If I'm being snotty I apologize, but I will return fire when fired
> upon. And as you can see I will fully substantiate my arguments,
> unlike some others here !
Fine. Let me know when you do substantiate your arguments. So far, you
have
utterly failed to explain how the one piece of concrete data you have -
that
you were able to flex the horizontal stabilizer mounting by moving the
stabilizer tip - has anything at all to do with inflight structural
failure
*of* *the* *wings*. Until you do, you're just blowing smoke.
> From a highly experienced air****t bum and highly NON-engineering-
> degreed mechanic, I am telling you all that there is an issue on the
> tail mounting of the Zenair design. I don't know if it is a big
> problem, a fatal accident waiting to happen, hugely overbuilt, or
> something that will wiggle but never break. That is a question for the
> engineers to clarify but someone needs to look at it.
This is not borne out on my aircraft.
Further, it has never once been implicated in any accident, fatal or
otherwise, of the 601XL. Therefore, why, exactly, is it relevant?
> I'm saying that there is a tragic problem with the CH601XL airplane
> design. There are too many catastrophic structural failures that
> cannot be swept under the rug of builder error or amateur aerobatics.
That remains to be seen. I do think there's a problem somewhere. There are
enough possibilities, and enough factors that can interact, that I do not
believe there is an inherent design flaw sufficient to cause structural
failure of an aircraft that is properly built, well maintained, and
conservatively flown. That there has been no common factor found in the
accidents in the type tends to bear out that opinion.
Until the problem is found, I intend to maintain my aircraft to the
highest
standards of airworthiness possible, and fly it well within its
performance
envelope and my capabilities as a 225-hour, non-instrument-rated private
pilot. That's all I can do.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com
http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (got it!)
|
