 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pchapman(at)ionsys.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:11 pm Post subject: 801 inflight breakup in 2003 |
 |
|
Just from what I've read here on the list (and archives), the
accident is still a little mysterious and perhaps a bit of a sore
spot in that there's little evidence available to support different
theories. On the one hand there's still suspicion about the elevator
extension, on the other hand it may just be the pilot playing around
and overstressing the aircraft.
The NTSB documents are pretty sparse. (# LAX03FA102) They don't go
into any detail at all, and there was no interest even in describing
any probable breakup sequence. It is also difficult to interpret the
NTSB's description of damage to various parts, as to which direction
the wing and tail parts failed.
The elevator extension is mentioned but not commented on. The Factual
Report quotes an FAA publication, stating "Amateur builders are free
to develop their own designs or build from existing designs. We do
not approve these designs and it would be impractical to develop
design standards for the wide variety of design configurations,
created by designers, kit manufacturers, and amateur builders." So
in the end they are seem to be saying, "looking at the structural
failure in detail is not our problem".
The NTSB report didn't state that the pilot was "heavily impaired by
narcotics", but said that chemical traces were consistent with
smoking at least one joint within 12 hours. They were trying to be
somewhat precise, since for the passenger, they said the same but
within 2 hours. So unless there's other evidence, I wouldn't call the
pilot "heavily" impaired, although one can still make inferences
about his attitude towards the flight if one wishes.
Back when the accident happened, it sounded like Ben Haas was hoping
to examine the wreckage or otherwise get further info from the
investigators, but I guess no further info could be obtained?
Presumably Zenair had nothing more to add?
Maybe the importance of all this is less now for 801 owners, given
that there's a newer design extended horizontal tail (stab &
elevator) that presumably is beefed up over both the original short
span tail and the Flypass elevator extansion?
I don't have any particular angle on all this; I was just curious
about the implications of a couple recent posts mentioning the accident.
Peter Chapman
Toronto, ON
| | - 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 |
|
 |
n801bh(at)netzero.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:47 am Post subject: 801 inflight breakup in 2003 |
|
|
Within a week of the accident I called the LA division of the Faa that was doing the investigation, Spoke with the lead guy and he went strictly by the protocal and didn't speculate on the crash. I told him I was a current builder and was asking some questions for about a dozen other builders. He did say and I quote " if you are building one of thses planes I would be VERY concerned". My next question to him was, can I look over the wreckage either by myself or with you present, he said they were about to conclude their inspection of the wreckage and that I would need to contact the next of kin for permission. The 17 year old daughter was not in a frame of mind to even talk to so I called the airplane wrecking yard that the debris was in. He told me that if I pay the, at that time, current charges of retrieval and storage which was then 1845.00$ I could come look at it and then to call the insurance company to try to buy the stuff. They never called back.... and I never drove to California to look.
Several of us 801 builders almost daily chatted on Yahoo messenger so we set up a group chat and brainstormed for several hours on what we knew. I did call the TV reporter who flew ovewr the site and filmed the wreckage for the evening news, he was a 5000+ pilot and knew what he was talking about.
Our concensis of the senerio was this, the plane was probabl;y doing aerobatics, most probably a loop, as all the 801 builders know the elevator is fastened on by a single pivot bolt in the middle and two little pins on each end. Those pins are captured by those this aluminum triangle pieces riveted on to the end of the Horizontal stabilizer. The loading of the elevator sheared off the the tip extensions, that sent the the elevator and probably the horizontal stabilizer into the rudder, shearing it off, the plane then instantly went nose down, then failed both wings in the negative G axis and the fuselage then lawn darted another two+ miles till it hit the farm field. It was hard for us to believe how a plane that flies at maybe 100mph could scatter itself over that wide of an area but the 14,000 agl that Mark mentioned explains that.
What apparently happened when ZAC introduced the 'NEW" larger horizontal stab was to use a longer spar to carry the load, not just add on tip extensions.
signs and it would be impractical to develop
design standards for the wide variety of design configurations,
created by designers, kit manufacturers, and amateur builders." So
in the end they are seem to be saying, "looking at the structural
failure in detail is not our problem".
The NTSB report didn't state that the pilot was "heavily impaired by
narcotics", but said that chemical traces were consistent with
smoking at least one joint within 12 hours. They were trying to be
somewhat precise, since for the passenger, they said the same but
within 2 hours. So unless there's other evidence, I wouldn't call the
pilot "heavily" impaired, although one can still make inferences
about his attitude towards the flight if one wishes.
Back when the accident happened, it sounded like Ben Haas was hoping
to examine the wreckage or otherwise get further info from the
investigators, but I guess no further info could be obtained?
Presumably Zenair had nothing more to add?
Maybe the importance of all this is less now for 801 owners, given
that there's a newer design extended horizontal tail (stab &
elevator) that presumably is beefed up over both the original short
span tail and the Flypass elevator extansion?
I don't have any particular angle on all this; I was just curious
about the implications of a couple recent posts mentioning the accident.
Peter Chapman
Toronto, ON&nbs======================== -- Please Support&nbp; (And Get Som;November is the Annual List Fund Raiser.& link below to find out more about
[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 |
|
|
|
|
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
