STILL LOOSING WINGS - another killed

Just want to draw your attentions to the reality that another 601XL folded up on November the 6th, killing the sole occupant during a cross country flight during which visual met. conditions prevailed. NTSB Ident. CEN10FA042.

ON BEHALF OF PASSENGERS

In light of the ongoing carnage.....

Please be fair by not flying with passengers. You know it would be wrong..............

Just want to draw your attentions to the reality that another 601XL folded up on November the 6th, killing the sole occupant during a cross country flight during which visual met. conditions prevailed. NTSB Ident. CEN10FA042.ON BEHALF OF PASSENGERS

 

In light of the ongoing carnage.....

 

Please be fair by not flying with passengers. You know it would be wrong..............

May I amend your plea??

601XL owners

In light of the ongoing problems with your aircraft type,

please ensure that you comply with all of the manufacturers ADs.

It is sad to hear of another fatality in aviation.

nong, may I ask that we, involved in aviation, stick to cause-effect, logic and due process and not be tempted to follow the short sighted, alarmist, attention grabbing, non considered approach of the mass media. I am not making this accusation of your post but a more measured approach might be more appropriate.May I amend your plea??

 

601XL owners

 

In light of the ongoing problems with your aircraft type,

 

please ensure that you comply with all of the manufacturers ADs.

 

It is sad to hear of another fatality in aviation.

I don't see anything wrong with Nong's post, and it certainly isn't based on a reaction to the "mass media". It is a fair request, I reckon, based on the NTSB report and other data on several recent accidents.

To use a Qwerty-ism "we who are involved in aviation" (or those with the experience that the Nong has) need to speak plainly when they can see an issue, particulalry safety & multiple fatality related.

Look you guys, why go troppo over the Zenair. If you want to use terms like carnage, or plea for restraint of some kind turn your attention to alcohol and the road, now that my friends is carnage and that is where restraint is required.

I object to hysteria, particularly when its aimed at aviation. When its aimed at aviation by pilots we have a recipie for CASA to introduce more gems like the ASIC. Or worse, how about an industry wide buerocratic clampdown on everything complete with a new set of regs for us to comply with. If we keep the hysteria up thats what we will all wear. Am I the only person that can see this direct link?? Hysteria will get a knee jerk reaction, now we are looking at back scatter x-ray that sees through you clothes and its comming due to hysteria.

Look you guys, why go troppo over the Zenair. If you want to use terms like carnage, or plea for restraint of some kind turn your attention to alcohol and the road, now that my friends is carnage and that is where restraint is required.I object to hysteria, particularly when its aimed at aviation. When its aimed at aviation by pilots we have a recipie for CASA to introduce more gems like the ASIC. Or worse, how about an industry wide buerocratic clampdown on everything complete with a new set of regs for us to comply with. If we keep the hysteria up thats what we will all wear. Am I the only person that can see this direct link?? Hysteria will get a knee jerk reaction, now we are looking at back scatter x-ray that sees through you clothes and its comming due to hysteria.

Have searched all previous posts on this thread and can't find "carnage" or any "plea for restraint" and can't detect "hysteria" anywhere, except perhaps in your last para.

I reflect again, just what is wrong with the Nong's post? It is "drawing your attention" to a factual NTSB Report on a real recent fatal accident where an in-flight beak-up appears obvious ............. and "flutter" wasn't even mentioned.

Have searched all previous posts on this thread and can't find "carnage" or any "plea for restraint" and can't detect "hysteria" anywhere,.........

Re read post number 1. and then my post above.

Re read post number 1. and then my post above.

But I still say that Post #1 was not over the top.

Have a look at this link, seems the FAA are very concerned, as I would be if I was building/flying one.

The Kathryn Report: Zodiac CH601XL and CH650 Wing Structural Modifications - Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin

Baph

But I still say that Post #1 was not over the top.

Zenith Structure.

A couple of comments.

Avoiding newspaper type descriptions IS desireable. They do seek attention getting phrases and words, and it works. They sell papers and sometimes after you read the article you think "what was that all about?"

Turbo, The authorities are quite reluctant to ground aircraft and in the past they have not done it when perhaps they should (often in retrospect) have.

Examples ,( NOT suggesting that they are the best ones)The L-188 Electra was flown with a speed restriction, which was later found the be near the worst speed to induce the "flutter" type occurrence which caused the wings to come off. Dc10 Cargo door and floor deformation problems.. B737 rudder actuator (faults in flight jamming). The Fairchild (american built) Fokker F-27 wing failures F27's world wide were giver speed restrictions. The problem was eventually found to be confined to the Fairchild ones as they did not use redux bonding as well as rivetting in the wing construction.

The Aerocommander wing is one that the Australian authorities did a very good job of finding what the fault was. (outer wing spar manufacturing technique) It is on line at the CASA site. Some where?

CASA did ground a lot of aircraft a few years ago over a component of the fuel injection system, and came in for a lot of flack over that as it was considered as an unnecessary over reaction and moderated their requirements subsequently. In flight structural failure or fire are a couple of the worst things to happen. The Zenith that we are referring to has been the subject of quite a few AD's or AN's for about 6 months now and some are mods and some are maintenance matters. As I read it if the aircraft is compliant, then it can fly. That is how the administration of these matters works with the FAA.It is certified in different categories and has different requirements for the different categories. that may be a curious complexity. I do believe that if it was necessary, they would be grounded. They are only a small show, not like as if they are built at the "lazy B" at Seattle where you would ground 1/3rd of the aircraft in the world with some models. Nev

If you want to read some angry posts, log onto a US Zenair owners forum...

There has been a list of modifications released for the design. The designer still openly dissagrees with it all and is sticking by his original design. But anyway, back to the US forums.

Many people who swayed more to the pilot side than the builder side had been drawn in by the quick build kit. Unfortunatly the modifications required are quite extensive with some builders quoting that the mods will take longer to incorporate than what it took to build their quick build kit. Poor buggers..... I can only imagine how heart broken I would be if I where in that situation.

From my understanding there have been a number of quick build kits sold in Australia. Can anyone here comment on what mods are occuring and how they will be approaching it?

Sorry... age-related technical incompetence

Hi folks

Some of this discussion is a little emotive and it always concerns me that objectivity and caution may both be lost in such circumstances.

While the likelihood of someone taking such umbrage as to seek recourse to legal process because of things said here is no doubt remote, it's always good to remember that the High Court decision in Down Jones v Gutnik held that defamatory material on the internet is published wherever it is viewed and Dow Jones ended up having to pay Joe's costs, etc.

A visitor to this site based in the US, for example would be able to take a defamation action against both author and site owner here in Oz (where proof is easier because we don't have a Bill of Rights including free speech) or in the USA, or elsewhere.

For this reason it is perhaps better to assert things broadly as personal opinion --- I think that any aircraft exhibiting airworthiness defects should be grounded until properly assessed and any defect is rectified --- rather than asserting them as fact --- the manufacturer of xxxx is irresponsible by denying there is an issue and letting the aircraft continue to fly.

Others with much deeper pockets will end up deciding if the latter proposition is true.

regards

kaz

Wether or not the Zenith has a problem or should be grounded is not for me to comment on I do feel that it is relevant for anyone to post their views, especially about safety matters, without having to think about big brother or the media watching and waiting for ammunition to have a go at us.

Good Idea in Principle.

Nonetheless the USA is litigation crazy. This was the main reason that the once totally pre-eminent light aircraft industry in the USA was virtually brought to it's knees. Nev

Wether or not the Zenith has a problem or should be grounded is not for me to comment on I do feel that it is relevant for anyone to post their views, especially about safety matters, without having to think about big brother or the media watching and waiting for ammunition to have a go at us.

Sorry... age-related technical incompetenceHi folks

 

Some of this discussion is a little emotive and it always concerns me that objectivity and caution may both be lost in such circumstances.

 

While the likelihood of someone taking such umbrage as to seek recourse to legal process because of things said here is no doubt remote, it's always good to remember that the High Court decision in Down Jones v Gutnik held that defamatory material on the internet is published wherever it is viewed and Dow Jones ended up having to pay Joe's costs, etc.

 

A visitor to this site based in the US, for example would be able to take a defamation action against both author and site owner here in Oz (where proof is easier because we don't have a Bill of Rights including free speech) or in the USA, or elsewhere.

 

For this reason it is perhaps better to assert things broadly as personal opinion --- I think that any aircraft exhibiting airworthiness defects should be grounded until properly assessed and any defect is rectified --- rather than asserting them as fact --- the manufacturer of xxxx is irresponsible by denying there is an issue and letting the aircraft continue to fly.

 

Others with much deeper pockets will end up deciding if the latter proposition is true.

 

regards

 

kaz

I am not saying that anyone can post what ever they like though as the site and its content has to be respected by everyone that uses it.

Sorry for butting in on the thread so

It appears to me to be about as serious a problem as you can get in aviation, with X number of failures now, and how many dead ?....you wouldn't see me in one until it's sorted.

Additionally it doesn't surprise me that the designer has taken the stance he appears to have taken. I met and spoke to the man at length at Oshkosh once, and a more oppinionated man you will never meet. I feel sorry for any entity trying to tell him what to do...............

Ok, what's more inconvient ??......fixing the wing so it's not going to break, or organizing a funeral.

Blackrod, No he wouldn't have to organize it, but unfortunatly he could be the main guest. Having built a few wings myself over the years, my feelings are with your friend also. I can't imagine anything more discouraging and depressing than to have to pull a wing apart, that you have just spent many, many carefull hours constructing. It is a very unfortunate situation....

While I feel sorry for the extra work that will have to be undertaken to (apparently) make these aircraft safe to fly, what I rearly feel sorry for are the owners of them who will take a large financial hit when they sell even if the moderfications work in the long term.

The old saying that some of the mud always sticks is very true.

I just wonder when the owner's class action will be started in the land of legal litergation?

This is old news to Zenith 601xl builders as most if not all are already in the process of installing the upgrade mods to have a greater safety margin to an already proven design if operated within the design envelope.The Zenith demo plane has over 1000hrs and many hundreds of completed aircraft have accumulated many more.This sport aircraft is now the most tested in the world with engineers from across the world reviewing the design and having an input on the upgrade mods.The latest wing load test [ on the upgraded wing spar, center spar] showed that the wing attach bolts bent rather then any spar failure as it was loaded well past Ultimate Load so now we use NAS 6205 bolts instead of An-6 [6 bolts on each wing attachment] cheers T87

This is old news to Zenith 601xl builders as most if not all are already in the process of installing the upgrade mods to have a greater safety margin to an already proven design if operated within the design envelope.The Zenith demo plane has over 1000hrs and many hundreds of completed aircraft have accumulated many more.This sport aircraft is now the most tested in the world with engineers from across the world reviewing the design and having an input on the upgrade mods.The latest wing load test [ on the upgraded wing spar, center spar] showed that the wing attach bolts bent rather then any spar failure as it was loaded well past Ultimate Load so now we use NAS 6205 bolts instead of An-6 [6 bolts on each wing attachment] cheers T87

I wonder if it was "old news" to the poor bugger in Arkansas 56 days ago?

I wonder if it was "old news" to the poor bugger in Arkanasa 56 days ago?

But I doubt if any of those tragic deaths were attributed to a fatal flaw in the vehicle design.