 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MaxNr(at)aol.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:03 am Post subject: British 601Crash (was: 601 Crash) |
 |
|
Don't tell me that ZAC has to get more sand bags and sacrifice yet another airframe. It would help if the FAA or somebody provided more detail about these accidents. (Juan reported a week ago that inadequate wing attach bolts were installed in one instance.) Some suspect that poor pilot technique is a factor. Isn't it uncomfortable to be a passenger while some oaf is abusing the controls? If I fly with one of these guys, I'll sure sound off. Some suspect that heavy or light engines put the operating CG out of whack and causes a lack of harmony in the controls. If you're near a limit, you just might need to also compute the landing CG too. Just fix your CG problem with ballast and move on. Yes, bird strikes hurt. I've had a few. Seen many more. A friend took an osprey through the wind shield that broke his collar bone and stunned him. He recovered at 300' and was able to land OK. The fed F&W guy could only express remorse over the late endangered bird. I think it was the same bird that attacked me months earlier when I entered his territory. I evaded. Does anybody really know how many G's they put on their plane? I am reserving panel space for a military recording accelerometer (G meter) that I happen to have. A small fish scale would also work. I'll do without the LRI or AOA. Turbulence can put some G's on an airframe. But nothing like what you get if you loose it in inadvertent IMC.(You DO know that the failure mode breaks the wings DOWNWARD don't you?) Maneuvers put on smaller loads than you think. A 100 HP plane with wing loading less than 10lbs per sq ft will pull about 2 G in a loop, all positive G. A barrel roll is less, still all positive. Have someone show you how before doing these. A 601 aint a Pitts Special and I aint Sean Tucker. A level, 60 deg banked turn will also be at 2 G and you can hold that 2 G till you run out of gas. Thus the level turn will stress more. The builders web site at http://www.ch601.org/ in the builders resource area mentions that changes to the 601XL plans suggest some increased sheet thickness. I didn't get the memo on the plans change and have not yet dug into the layouts. Anybody get the change? Fly safe and don't be afraid.
Bob Dingley
Pace,FL
XL/Lyc ( At the homebuilders equivalent stage of rearranging my sock drawer)
**************
It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
(http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001) [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gig Giacona
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1416
Location: El Dorado Arkansas USA
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:04 am Post subject: Re: British 601Crash (was: 601 Crash) |
|
|
Maneuvers performed correctly...
Screw one up and the Gs can go just about anywhere.
| MaxNr(at)aol.com wrote: | Maneuvers put on smaller loads than you think.
Bob Dingley
Pace,FL
XL/Lyc ( At the homebuilders equivalent stage of rearranging my sock drawer) |
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
_________________
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cookwithgas
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 159
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:25 am Post subject: Re: British 601Crash (was: 601 Crash) |
|
|
Bob:
The sheet change as far as I know was the rear fuselage sides from .016 to .025" which seems significant. I changed mine from .016 to .020" prior to the change on the good advice of Larry McFarland. My control surfaces are still .016" which is still in the plans I believe. My plans are from late 2002 and early 2003. I was following all of the updates while building.
Another significant change is that plans builders generally use 1/8" angle for the longerons instead of the .093" supplied with the kits.
Also, some of us plans-builders are using a full-length bottom longeron instead of splicing since the 1/8" angle comes in 25' lengths. I just used a full length of the 1/8" on both sides of the bottom of the fuselage instead of using .040" in the rear, .093" in the front and splicing as shown on 6-B-2.
Does that make sense? Here's a picture of my two lovely assistance holding my bottom fuselage with no splices in the longerons.
http://www.cooknwithgas.com/6_13_04_BellyFinished.JPG
Point is - there are many different methods used in the construction of these home-built, experimental airplanes.
Scott Laughlin
Omaha, Nebraska
Finished & Flying
www.cooknwithgas.com
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
