The FAA has released their report on the Zodiac 601XL

[steingar]

For the most part no one is. Jay has made some serious accusations against the MC and the POA community. At least for what I see in this thread I consider them not very well founded. No one has taken exception with Jay, but a number of posters have issues with his aircraft. These issue are substantial, as they are corroborated by the NTSB and the FAA. Probably the most salient is that someone called a pilot "dumb" when he continued to fly an aircraft with known safety issues. I myself consider such a label unduly harsh, but I will note that flying any aircraft with a known safety issue, especially one where the safety issue has not clearly been defined, does to me indicate poor judgement. I think the argument then shifts to "what constitutes a known safety issue" and at what point the issue clearly arose in reference to the Zodiaks. My guess is that the issue clearly arose for Jay somewhat later than others, which is quite understandable. I recall a period when Jay wanted to take some training or a test ride, and had difficulty doing so because there where CFIs reluctant to fly in the machine. The training and test rides were accomplished without incident, so who was correct? I imagine there were times when Jay was still flying his machine when others of us would have said not to. The neither makes us right or him wrong, just a matter of opinion.

 

[SteveinIndy]

The use of the word "dumb" was not started by me, it was carried over from the comments from someone else and a post that was deleted by the MC. The word dumb was being associated with my friend that was killed in AU and I took offense to it. I was defending the dead, his minor children, and his widow in a public forum where it is entirely possible they could read this.

I did not start it, nor was I referring to Jay specifically. Jay took offense, and got his feeling hurt, posted several posts that contained vulgarities and those posts were deleted.

I didn't think you started it. I was referring to TMetzinger's choice of words. Sorry to hear about your friend. Hopefully solutions can be found that effectively keep this problem from claiming anyone else's friends. As someone who has lost seven friends and acquaintances in the past two years to crashes (GA and aeromedical), I believe we have no higher duty than to learn and prevent the repeat of prior mistakes.

 

[weilke]

You guys need to get over your personality conflicts.

 

[SteveinIndy]

You guys need to get over your personality conflicts.

No conflict on this end. I actually happen to like both TMetzinger and Jay....don't know Geico well enough to have an opinion one way or the other. There are only one person on here I have anything against and that is because he lost his cool and got in my face in person a couple of years back before I even joined the forums.

 

[steingar]

Same here. I am in no way in conflict with anyone in this thread. Just telling it the way I see it.

 

[weilke]

Ah, no conflict, people just screaming at each other for no good reason

 

[steingar]

Ah, no conflict, people just screaming at each other for no good reason

You must lead a very quiet life.

 

[TMetzinger]

I don't think I yelled at anybody. I was just pointing out the difference a person might feel if between being told something was "not smart" and feeling that they were being called "a dumb pilot". Note that I'm not saying anyone intentionally called anybody anything.

 

[dmccormack]

I don't think I yelled at anybody. I was just pointing out the difference a person might feel if between being told something was "not smart" and feeling that they were being called "a dumb pilot". Note that I'm not saying anyone intentionally called anybody anything.

Wow... I've been called far worse than "dumb" by professionals.

Somehow I remain blithely unaffected.

 

[SteveinIndy]

Ah, no conflict, people just screaming at each other for no good reason

I don't think anyone even "raised their voice" let alone "screamed" at anyone. Well, Jay was a little ticked, but it wasn't out of hand. Heck, even the Cirrus mid-air thread remained remarkably civil compare to other threads involving that particular type of aircraft. Perhaps things are improving from a civility standpoint....they seem to be, at least from what I can see.

Wow... I've been called far worse than "dumb" by professionals.

Somehow I remain blithely unaffected.

Likewise. You've never been screamed at until you've been screamed at by a spoiled surgeon. The difference between amateurs and professionals is the ability to take that screaming, remain calm, pick out the useful bits of it and shrug the insults about themselves, their mother, et al off like water off a duck's ass.

 

[dmccormack]

Likewise. You've never been screamed at until you've been screamed at by a spoiled surgeon. The difference between amateurs and professionals is the ability to take that screaming, remain calm, pick out the useful bits of it and shrug the insults about themselves, their mother, et al off like water off a duck's ass.

Officer Candidate School TAC officers can be fairly proficient, boisterous, and spot-on critics.

 

[SteveinIndy]

Officer Candidate School TAC officers can be fairly proficient, boisterous, and spot-on critics.

+1. Never went through OCS but I was in the military so I understand that completely as well.

 

[dmccormack]

+1. Never went through OCS but I was in the military so I understand that completely as well.

I was a candidate and later came back as a TAC.

It was amazing how brutal direct, honest correction in front of peers could be.

And yet -- it was probably the most effective personal learning that ever happened.

 

[SteveinIndy]

I was a candidate and later came back as a TAC.

It was amazing how brutal direct, honest correction in front of peers could be.

And yet -- it was probably the most effective personal learning that ever happened.

I am a big believer that when we started to "soften" our approaches to education to the point where you can't be blunt with someone because you might hurt their feelings, we started to fail as a society. There is nothing wrong with being direct and honest so long as you are not actually doing for alterior motives (to actually inflict anguish on the other person).

 

[dmccormack]

There is nothing wrong with being direct and honest so long as you are not actually doing for ulterior motives (to actually inflict anguish on the other person).

Agreed.

 

[rpadula]

I was responding to the post about market value of a plane with a structural history. The RV-3 and the Zodiac are similar in that regard. Only time will tell if the market will be there for the Zodiac, and if history can tell us anything by looking at the RV-3 the value will come back.

It may. I suppose it depends on nature of the fault and the confidence in the fix. I can think of two examples. One, the Commanders have an AD on them where the front main spars were cracking where the landing gear side brace attached. But it took about 10 years for them to start showing up. After review, a miscalculation in the loading was found, so a mod was designed and installed. Problem solved.

Won't the FAA/NTSB do tests on it to make sure that it reasonably fixes the problem before allowing them to be ungrounded?

doubt it. LSA is completely self governed under the ASTM standards. FAA doesnt dip their finger in certification. We (Collective) wanted cheaper airplanes, and we got them. Saved all that money in expensive FAA certification costs.

This brings me to my second example. From what I've read, the Cessna 441 came out in an era where the manufacturers had a little "self-certification" leeway. Unfortunately, one crashed because of flutter problems with the tail. They at first thought the trim needed strengthening (two tab controls vs. the original one), but that didn't worth either and Cessna ended up redesigning the whole tail, and replaced them completely on planes that had already been built and were grounded.

No they won't. In fact, if you read the report, the FAA has recomended a series of test for the aircraft with the new modifications. From what I understand, Zenith has already come out saying that they do not intend to do additional testing (particularly the more expensive testing) because they feel that their modifications go beyond what was needed, and that the FAA's calculations were extremely conservative. Time will tell.

And this is where I wonder if they'll have a confidence problem. Stopping short in their testing isn't good. The FAA may be bureaucratic, but there's a lot of experience in there, too. I read the report, and while I'm not an AE, I found the load analysis pages fascinating. Conservatism is sometimes a good thing when it comes to protecting life and limb.

 

[SteveinIndy]

This brings me to my second example. From what I've read, the Cessna 441 came out in an era where the manufacturers had a little "self-certification" leeway. Unfortunately, one crashed because of flutter problems with the tail. They at first thought the trim needed strengthening (two tab controls vs. the original one), but that didn't worth either and Cessna ended up redesigning the whole tail, and replaced them completely on planes that had already been built and were grounded.

What I fear is that the leeway the LSA community is being given may come back to bite them in their ass if we have a couple more models experience problems like this due to faulty design. I mean, this is only the third experimental/homebuilt to have a grounding order go into effect- per the AOPA ASF in a recent article; if anyone knows what the other two were please let me know....I can't find the information anywhere- but if other aircraft begin to have serious problems in close succession it might lead the LSA and experimental community to be under much closer scrutiny than that with which they currently deal. As much as it might be beneficial from a safety standpoint, it could really hurt GA to have that kind of bad press and negative attention.

 

[jmaynard]

I believe that my decision to continue to fly my aircraft when I did, and to stop flying it when I did, was based on sound reasoning and the information I had at the time. I took a sober assessment of the risks, and of the published facts - which were quite contradictory even within the NTSB's own reporting! - and thought about them all, and came up with the answer I did, which was that the aircraft was safe to fly as long as it was flown conservatively, maintained rigorously, and inspected regularly.

I stand behind that reasoning today. There was no indication of the design deficiencies the FAA found in ANY published source anywhere. The NTSB claimed there was a possibility of flutter, but their very own accident reports seemed to explicitly rule it out: not a single one mentioned oscillatory overloading, but did mention static overloading. Flutter causes oscillatory overloading. Static overloading is caused by more conventional overloads such as excessive Gs. Further, a detailed flutter analysis conducted by a well-respected professor in Germany found no tendency to flutter when the aileron cable tensions were properly set. Based on that, it was hard to understand just where the NTSB got the idea that flutter was likely.

Nevertheless, when the grounding order came along, I obeyed it, not only because I was legally required to (the AMD safety alert carries the legal force of an AD for my aircraft), but because it was the right thing to do. The FAA's report raises serious questions, but I'm confident that the modification will cause the aircraft to comfortably exceed the required margins. (FWIW, it'll cost $5750 to have the aircraft modified by AMD, plus getting the aircraft to KEZM for the two weeks required.) (Edit: The price will go up to $6950 in 10 days.)

The NTSB is not perfect, and has a tendency to cry wolf a bit. If they had come out with clear and convincing evidence that flutter was involved, I'd have grounded my airplane then. They didn't.

As for being called "dumb" for making the decision I did, I feel that is a direct attack on my competence as a pilot and as an instructor. It implies that my ADM abilities are not up to an acceptable standard, and if I can't make acceptable decisions on my own, how on earth can I teach a student to make the proper decision?

I appreciate the cause of Geico266's hatred of the Zodiac. That does not mean he gets to call me dumb, and imply I am not fit to fly or teach, for making the decision I did. The MC backed him up. That's why I don't feel welcome.

 

[mcjon77]

....I mean, this is only the third experimental/homebuilt to have a grounding order go into effect- per the AOPA ASF in a recent article; if anyone knows what the other two were please let me know....I can't find the information anywhere- ...

I know one of them was the RV-3, back in the early 80's. There were some wing failures during aerobatic manuvers. As a result the FAA revoked all RV-3 airworthiness certificates. The airworthiness cert could only be reissued if there was a stipulation in the operating limitations stating that aerobatics were not permitted. After Van came up with a fix, the FAA agreed to allow RV-3 Op lims permit aerobatics if they had the modified wing.

I don't know what the other plane was.

 

[jmaynard]

I did not start it, nor was I referring to Jay specifically.

You said that any pilot who flew a Zodiac after the NTSB said they should be grounded was dumb. You knew full well that I'd done so. You were referring to me.

Jay took offense

You're damned right I did, and I still do. I'll offer you a piece of advice: don't let me know who you are should we ever meet in person. I'm not going to do anything physical, but you may not like just what I'd have to say to you in person.

posted several posts that contained vulgarities and those posts were deleted.

You had several posts deleted, as well. Don't forget that. I consider your post a naked personal attack on me as a pilot and as an instructor. That you stand behind it only continues the attack. That, on top of your comments about my costume, make you someone I have no desire to associate with.

I don't need to come here to get attacked. I can get that lots of places.

 

[mcjon77]

...And this is where I wonder if they'll have a confidence problem. Stopping short in their testing isn't good. The FAA may be bureaucratic, but there's a lot of experience in there, too...

My suspicion is that the Zodiac, as a new SLSA, is done for in the market. There are just way too many SLSAs out there with as good, or better, performance that do not have the history. They have only sold 1 in the past 8 months (May 2009-January 2010), whereas they sold 11 in the 4 months before (January 2009-May 2009). Especially with the Pipersport coming on the market, and the Skycatcher coming soon, some companies are going to get pushed out.

As far as Zodiac homebuilts, I think they will always sell plans (you can still buy plans to Chris Heintz' early designs from Zenith). They will probably still supply parts. The kits, who knows? The RV12 and Rans S19 are direct competitors in the kit market.

I am still trying to figure out how AMD is keeping its doors open, considering it's lack of sales over the past 8 months.

 

[Henning]

As for being called "dumb" for making the decision I did, I feel that is a direct attack on my competence as a pilot and as an instructor. It implies that my ADM abilities are not up to an acceptable standard, and if I can't make acceptable decisions on my own, how on earth can I teach a student to make the proper decision?

It's hard to fathom that anyone that spends any time in internet forums hasn't been called much worse than "dumb" on more than one occasion. Personally, I don't have any issue with your ADM process in this matter and have often taken what people view as "dumb" risks by calculating the situation in greater detail than they have the ability. That's why I have taken many high risk/ high pay jobs that others refuse and think, even stating "You're an idiot", to which my response is, "Yeah, but I'm smarter than you, that's why I get away with it." To let one's self be annoyed by such comments is to devalue yourself, and that is the only real loss that comes from such reactions.

 

[gismo]

I am a big believer that when we started to "soften" our approaches to education to the point where you can't be blunt with someone because you might hurt their feelings, we started to fail as a society. There is nothing wrong with being direct and honest so long as you are not actually doing for alterior motives (to actually inflict anguish on the other person).

Perhaps not "wrong" in the moral sense (although just because the inflicter has no ulterior motive that they are aware of doesn't necessarily make it right) but often inappropriate from an effectiveness perspective. It really depends on the recipient, some folks seem to respond well to "direct and honest" and others come away feeling abused and resentful which rarely enhances learning.

 

[SCCutler]

I *hate* booger-flicking!

 

[jesse]

I *hate* booger-flicking!

It is almost as bad as someone holding you down and then slowly spitting in your face.

 

[Trapper John]

And this is where I wonder if they'll have a confidence problem. Stopping short in their testing isn't good. The FAA may be bureaucratic, but there's a lot of experience in there, too. I read the report, and while I'm not an AE, I found the load analysis pages fascinating. Conservatism is sometimes a good thing when it comes to protecting life and limb.

AMD didn't do themselves any favors. Any time you see "non-conservative" in an engineering report, that's just a sanitized version of "design bust."


Trapper John

 

[Geico266]

You're damned right I did, and I still do. I'll offer you a piece of advice: don't let me know who you are should we ever meet in person. I'm not going to do anything physical, but you may not like just what I'd have to say to you in person.

Hmmmmm, a specific threat of a physical confrontation and attempted intimidation. Could I have a ruling by the MC?

Your continued escalation of this situation here, and now you have threaten continuation of the confrontation at any flyin we may be at? Nice Jay, real nice. I was hoping we could sit down and have a beer. Guess that is out of the question huh?

 

[Geico266]

It's hard to fathom that anyone that spends any time in internet forums hasn't been called much worse than "dumb" on more than one occasion. Personally, I don't have any issue with your ADM process in this matter and have often taken what people view as "dumb" risks by calculating the situation in greater detail than they have the ability. That's why I have taken many high risk/ high pay jobs that others refuse and think, even stating "You're an idiot", to which my response is, "Yeah, but I'm smarter than you, that's why I get away with it." To let one's self be annoyed by such comments is to devalue yourself, and that is the only real loss that comes from such reactions.

+1.

I have certainly called myself worse than "dumb". I've done things in aviation I am very proud of, and I've done things I would rather forget. What I never call "dumb" is other's honest input. It's their opinions based on their experience, level of training, and education.

 

[Trapper John]

And the nominees for best Drama Queen in an aviation role are...


Trapper John

 

[jmaynard]

Hmmmmm, a specific threat of a physical confrontation and attempted intimidation.

I specifically said that I would not do anything physical (you even quoted it), and I meant it. I don't operate that way.

Your continued escalation of this situation here, and now you have threaten continuation of the confrontation at any flyin we may be at? Nice Jay, real nice. I was hoping we could sit down and have a beer. Guess that is out of the question huh?

Continued via reply to PM.

 

[jmaynard]

It's hard to fathom that anyone that spends any time in internet forums hasn't been called much worse than "dumb" on more than one occasion.

I've been called far worse. The difference is that this is about something that I know I can always learn more about, and in a group composed of people whose opinions I value and respect, unlike the wider Internet.

Personally, I don't have any issue with your ADM process in this matter

Thank you.

 

[steingar]

Again, the point at which an aircraft has been determine to have a safety problem will vary for most people. For Geico, the Zodiak probably started having a safety problem the day one killed his pal. I doubt I would react any differently. For some, it was when the NTSB issued their report. Do you think perhaps the CFI who refused to go in the Zodiak questioned Jays ADM? But Jay says the NTSB often cries wolf, and he is not entirely incorrect. When the FAA weighed in, Jay was convinced the aircraft had a safety problem, and hung up his spurs, er, lighted Tron boot thingies.

 

[Keane]

Again, the point at which an aircraft has been determine to have a safety problem will vary for most people. For Geico, the Zodiak probably started having a safety problem the day one killed his pal. I doubt I would react any differently. For some, it was when the NTSB issued their report. Do you think perhaps the CFI who refused to go in the Zodiak questioned Jays ADM? But Jay says the NTSB often cries wolf, and he is not entirely incorrect. When the FAA weighed in, Jay was convinced the aircraft had a safety problem, and hung up his spurs, er, lighted Tron boot thingies.

What did the NTSB report say that we are referring to? I know there was quite a few of the original ones that were vague and said things like "aileron flutter" which I remember Jay saying was not an issue as long as you kept up on cable maintenance. If that were the case, I would think that having a reasonable way to avoid the issue is perfectly fine.

If on the other hand, it was "Wings fall off under normal loads" it would be foolhardy to fly without a positive way of avoiding the situation.

 

[wabower]

I rather enjoy it when I am acting in the capacity of flickor. Being the flickee isn't as much fun.

I *hate* booger-flicking!

 

[jstro]

I was hoping we could sit down and have a beer. Guess that is out of the question huh?

I'm a big fan of the "beer summit". I hope you guys can have one.

 

[Greebo]

Maybe they should just agree to meet behind the playground after school so they can settle this once and for all?

 

[Geico266]

Maybe they should just agree to meet behind the playground after school so they can settle this once and for all?

I have extended an offer to Jay to meet face to face via PM, and now publicly.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

WARNING: The following is an attempt at humor! I find laughter helps. And the dang prairie dog is FUNNY.

SUBTITLES: "DUMB?! You called me DUMB?! Them's fightin' words!"

 

[steingar]

This should subside if everyone is reasonable. There are and were good reasons to question the safety of Zodiaks, some did and some didn't. Some died and some lived. If someone wants to remain argumentative and hurt, it isn't my problem and I won't loose any sleep over it.

 

[TangoWhiskey]