Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Checking XL parts

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

Jaybannist(at)cs.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 9:30 am Post subject: Checking XL parts

I have, sadly, found several parts, supplied in my kit from ZAC, that have been cut to the wrong lengths.  Most recently, the fuselage-wing rear channel and the upper seat back support were cut too long and had to be trimmed.  The manual clearly says to measure 1120mm, out to out of the upper forward lngerons at the location of the upper seat back support.  The part must fit inside to inside of the longerons and the part measures 1150mm, clearly in error. 

 

 The moral of the story is: you must check the size of parts supplied by ZAC, and trim if necessary to get them to fit properly.

 

 Jay in Dallas, working on XL fuselage

dredmoody(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:46 am Post subject: Checking XL parts

A lot of the parts come to us needing to be trimmed or cut to length. The recent posts regarding the fuel filler cap flange not screwing down far enough to make contact with the nose skin for instance. Another example would be the X and Y coordinates that at least in my case don't coincide with the wing's rear channel and spar tip (and they absolutely must). It's not a big deal but it does keep us on our toes, doesn't it?



Ed

---- Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote: 

 	  Quote: 	
		   I have, sadly, found several parts, supplied in my kit from ZAC, that have 

 been cut to the wrong lengths.

admin(at)arachnidrobotics
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 1:29 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

    You'd be surprised at how many discrepancies you find when you start laying the 601XL out in a 3D CAD package for fabrication.  Skins run off at strange angles to spars, parts are miss-aligned by more than an inch or two, etc.  Obviously the airplane can be built safely and soundly using the existing plans, but it would sure be nice if we didn't have to fire up the thinking noodle every time we start a new part.  Whatever happened to good, quality CAD work?

  

dredmoody(at)cox.net wrote:[quote] --> Zenith-List message posted by: 



A lot of the parts come to us needing to be trimmed or cut to length. The recent posts regarding the fuel filler cap flange not screwing down far enough to make contact with the nose skin for instance. Another example would be the

naumuk(at)alltel.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:29 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

Tom-

     It hasn't existed since  CAD!

     In the old days, if you made a  mistake, you had to erase it and draw new lines. God help you if you had to  re-do a drawing that was inked with one of the old pens.

     The Zenith drawings leave  something to be desired, but you ought to see the crap I deal with every day at  work- and we're talking tenths, not 2mm tolerance!

                                                                   Bill

                                do  not archive

 [quote]   ---

dredmoody(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:30 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

---- Tom and Bren Henderson <admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com> wrote: 

 	  Quote: 	
		         You'd be surprised at how many discrepancies you find when you start laying the 601XL out in a 3D CAD package for fabrication. Whatever happened to good, quality CAD work?

   


	


I guess we could wait a couple of years for the RV12 to make it through to prduction and struggle through the teething pains that accompany the first several kits. And of course we would have to accept that Vans is only designing the "12" to use the Rotax 912S, no Soobs, no Corvairs, No Jabs, no Continentals or Lycomings. And we would certainly get used to the idea of having micro space between the panel and firewall, and having to settle for what ever the fuelage tank will hold...... 



Bottom line is the 601XL is a good design and a good kit; warts wrinkles and all. Really would be nice if it went together like an RV kit though.



Ed



Do Not Archive

601zv(at)ritternet.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:38 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

Yup, but if you only have 10 toes, you'll lose count almost before you 

start.



Do not archive.



---

cleonard52(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:47 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

IF YOU DID NOT HAVE TO DO ANY WORK ON THE PARTS, MAYBE THE PLANE WOULD NOT MEET THE 51% RULE. OR YOU COULD JUST CALL IT A QUICK BUILD KIT.

  

 CHARLES

  

  	  Quote: 	
		  -------------- Original message -------------- 

From: Jaybannist(at)cs.com 

I have, sadly, found several parts, supplied in my kit from ZAC, that have been cut to the wrong lengths.  Most recently, the fuselage-wing rear channel and the upper seat back support were cut too long and had to be trimmed.  The manual clearly says to measure 1120mm, out to out of the upper forward lngerons at the location of the upper seat back support.  The part must fit inside to inside of the longerons and the part measures 1150mm, clearly in error. 



The moral of the story is: you must check the size of parts supplied by ZAC, and trim if necessary to get them to fit properly.



Jay in Dallas, working on XL fuselage

p.mulwitz(at)worldnet.att
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:37 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

For people building a LSA compliant plane, the 51% rule doesn't 

apply.  This is certainly true for completions through January 2008, 

and might apply after that date.  All you need to do is get a E-LSA 

airworthiness certificate rather than E-AB which does indeed require 

51% work by amateurs.



It seems the benefits of using the E-LSA choice include shorter phase 

1 testing requirements and much simpler requirements (e.g. no 51% 

proof required).  The down side is you need to attend a short 

training course to qualify to sign off condition inspections.



On the core topic of this thread, I agree that the prints I received 

last year are very sloppy.  If an engineer who worked for me tried to 

release drawings of this quality for production I would fire 

him.  They were obviously not reviewed for accuracy and 

consistency.  Still, I believe the core design is sound and we don't 

need to worry about our wings folding up in the traffic pattern (at 

least I hope so).  The errors I have found merely cause scrapped parts.



Paul

XL fuselage



 	  Quote: 	
		  IF YOU DID NOT HAVE TO DO ANY WORK ON THE PARTS, MAYBE THE PLANE 

WOULD NOT MEET THE 51% RULE. OR YOU COULD JUST CALL IT A QUICK BUILD KIT.

admin(at)arachnidrobotics
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:56 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

    51%?  The quickbuild kit meets the 51% rule, so I'm thinking parts cut to the right length probably would too.  Did math change since I was in college?



cleonard52(at)comcast.net wrote: 	  Quote: 	
		    IF YOU DID NOT HAVE TO DO ANY WORK ON THE PARTS, MAYBE THE PLANE WOULD NOT MEET THE 51% RULE. OR YOU COULD JUST CALL IT A QUICK BUILD KIT.

  

 CHARLES

  

  	  Quote: 	
		  -------------- Original message -------------- 

From: Jaybannist(at)cs.com 

I have, sadly, found several parts, supplied in my kit from ZAC, that have been cut to the wrong lengths.  Most recently, the fuselage-wing rear  channel and the upper seat back support were cut too long and had to be trimmed.  The manual clearly says to measure 1120mm, out to out of the upper forward lngerons at the location of the upper seat back support.  The part must fit inside to inside of the longerons and the part measures 1150mm, clearly in error. 



The moral of the story is: you must check the size of parts supplied by ZAC, and trim if necessary to get them to fit properly.



Jay in Dallas, working on XL fuselage

jpellien

Joined: 24 Jun 2006
Posts: 21
Location: Basye, Virginia

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 5:14 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

As far as I know, there are no current ELSA kits available.  My

understanding of the rule is that an ELSA kit manufacturer first has to

produce a certified S-LSA and then he/she can sell ELSA kits that are exact

design duplicates of the SLSA that was certified. 



To date, nobody has produced a ELSA kit......that is not to say it cannot be

done, only that nobody has done it.



An individual or a company cannot just build a new kit aircraft and

designate it as an ELSA at the FAA inspection.



Jim



Jim Pellien

Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes

Sky Bryce Airport (VG18)

Basye, VA

www.MASPL.com

703-313-4818

 



--

_________________
Jim Pellien
Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes
703-313-4818
703-851-9375
www.MASPL.com
"Learn-2-Fly-in-1-Week"

bryanmmartin

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1018

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 5:40 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

On Jun 29, 2006, at 8:35 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 <p.mulwitz(at)worldnet.att.net>



 For people building a LSA compliant plane, the 51% rule doesn't  

 apply.  This is certainly true for completions through January  

 2008, and might apply after that date.  All you need to do is get a  

 E-LSA airworthiness certificate rather than E-AB which does indeed  

 require 51% work by amateurs.




	


Easier said than done. There are two ways to get an E-LSA certificate:



1. If the airplane is a "fat ultra-light" currently operating under  

the ultra-light training exemption, it can be registered in the E-LSA  

category and this must be done before January 2008 when the exemption  

is phased out. Since the CH 601 doesn't perform at all like an ultra- 

light (FAR 103), it's unlikely anybody will ever get or has ever  

gotten an ultra-light training exemption for one. I don't know if any  

exemptions are still being issued.



  2. The manufacturer must build an S-LSA compliant prototype and  

then sell E-LSA kits which must then be built exactly according to  

the plans. If you bought one of Zenith's E-AB kits, you can't  

complete it as an E-LSA. If you want to build an E-LSA registered  

plane you have to buy an E-LSA kit. At this time, I don't think  

Zenith is selling E-LSA kits and they don't have any immediate plans  

to do so. Czech Aircraft Works was selling E-LSA kits for the CH 601,  

but I don't know if they still are.



-- 

Bryan Martin

N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.

do not archive.

_________________
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.

admin(at)arachnidrobotics
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 5:40 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

    Thanks for the informed post.  I appreciate it.  The wrong info can cause no end of problems down the road for both newbies and the old timers.



Jim Pellien <jim(at)pellien.com> wrote:[quote] --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Pellien" 



As far as I know, there are no current ELSA kits available.  My

understanding of the rule is that an ELSA kit manufacturer first has to

produce a certified S-LSA and then he/she can sell ELSA kits that are exact

design duplicates of the SLSA that was certified. 



To date, nobody has produced a ELSA kit......that is not to say it cannot be

done, only that nobody has done it.



An individual or a company cannot just build a new kit aircraft and

designate it as an ELSA at the FAA inspection.



Jim



Jim  Pellien

Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes

Sky Bryce Airport (VG18)

Basye, VA

www.MASPL.com

703-313-4818

 



--

p.mulwitz(at)worldnet.att
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 6:52 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

Hi Jim,



That was my understanding too until I was corrected by the local FAA 

inspector who is also a very friendly home builder himself.  He 

issued an E-LSA certificate to one of our local chapter members for a 

Kitfox and gave it a 5 hour phase 1 flight test requirement because 

the engine and prop had been used together somewhere before (neither 

the engine nor prop was certified). It turns out the way the 

regulations were written the one covering the fat ultralights also 

covers virtually every kit built (or scratch built, for that matter) 

airplane.  It defines the eligible planes as anything that doesn't 

qualify as a part 103 ultralight.  That includes anything from a fat 

ultralight to a Boeing 707.  Of course the other LSA definition parts 

apply - single engine, two seats, etc.



That rule expires in January 2008 (unless my memory is playing tricks 

on me) and training can be conducted for hire in those E-LSA planes until 2010.



I can find the exact text for you if you would like, but you can take 

what I am telling you to the bank.  There really is a simple way to 

get an E-LSA airworthiness certificate for the next year and a 

half.  It may well be that after that you need to meet the more 

complex definition of E-LSA you mentioned.



Happy Landings,



Paul

XL fuselage.

At 06:12 PM 6/29/2006, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



As far as I know, there are no current ELSA kits available.  My

understanding of the rule is that an ELSA kit manufacturer first has to

produce a certified S-LSA and then he/she can sell ELSA kits that are exact

design duplicates of the SLSA that was certified.



To date, nobody has produced a ELSA kit......that is not to say it cannot be

done, only that nobody has done it.



An individual or a company cannot just build a new kit aircraft and

designate it as an ELSA at the FAA inspection.



Jim



Jim Pellien

Mid-Atlantic Sports Planes

Sky Bryce Airport (VG18)

Basye, VA

www.MASPL.com

703-313-4818

Ron Lendon

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 685
Location: Clinton Twp., MI

Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 7:03 pm Post subject: Re: Checking XL parts

Well that was real nice!  



Measure twice cut once.  I think I would be grateful, the part was to long and needed trimming.  Just think of the time it would have taken to put the material back on  



Happy building.

_________________
Ron Lendon
WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing
CH 601 XLB
N601LT - Flying
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Corvair Engine Prints:
https://sites.google.com/site/corvairenginedata/

ggower_99(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 5:15 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

Hello Jay,

   

  But work and cut with care,   Some parts are made longer in propouse (sp?) because they have to be fitted in some built stage.   Is better to adjust the lenght of the piece that to repeat the fuselage     (still not buildng the fuselage myself, so no truth advise yet)

   

  Remember   messure twice (or 3 times) and cut one...  Is more dificult to add 5mm to a part cut wrong that to trim  20mm.

   

  Smile,  from the extra material left, you have some scratch material you can sell to the recicler and buy some gas...  once you finished your airplane...   Just a joke 

   

  Saludos

  Gary Gower.

  Getting ready to fly tomorrow  the 701 at Chapala,  Mexico.

  Building a 601 XL.



Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

    	  Quote: 	
		  I have, sadly, found several parts, supplied in my kit from ZAC, that have been cut to the wrong lengths.  Most recently, the fuselage-wing rear channel and the upper seat back support were cut too long and had to be trimmed.  The manual clearly says to measure 1120mm, out to out of the upper forward lngerons at the location of the upper seat back support.  The part must fit inside to inside of the longerons and the part measures 1150mm, clearly in error. 



The moral of the story is: you must check the size of parts supplied by ZAC, and trim if necessary to get them to fit properly.



Jay in Dallas, working on XL fuselage

Jaybannist(at)cs.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 6:13 pm Post subject: Checking XL parts

Gary, It is not a big problem, just a "watch out" for those coming along after.  Mistakes in the fabricated kit parts, drawings and instructions can get tiresome, though and time-wasters.  I discovered another one just this morning.  The drawings show the out to out width of the upper longerons at the instrument panel location at 990 mm.  The instructions say to set the width of the longerons with an extrusion clamped across the longerons. However, the panel is 920 mm out to out and the ends of the instrument panel are supposed to be 28 mm from the outside edge of the longerons. 920 + 28 + 28 = 976.  That was actually the out to out of my longerons without any adjustments.  Just took a while to figure out what was wrong.  So, as you say, I just smiled and went on to the next thing; checking and checking and having a ball!

 

 Buenos noches - Jay in Dallas

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

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