Zenith Zodiac 601XL

[Mike Noel]

I remember one of the posters to this group bought an XL. I was wondering
how the AD is affecting him and how Zenith is helping with the situation.

Best Regards,
Mike.

[Tri-Pacer[_4_]]

>I remember one of the posters to this group bought an XL. I was wondering
> how the AD is affecting him and how Zenith is helping with the situation.


One of my neighbors has one.

All he has to do is get it to the factory and pay a lot of money and the AD
will be done.
The other option is to order a kit and have it installed here 80 -100 man
hours plus the kit---again lots of bucks.

Cheers:

Paul
N1431A
2AZ1

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Tri-Pacer" > wrote in message
...
> >I remember one of the posters to this group bought an XL. I was
> >wondering
>> how the AD is affecting him and how Zenith is helping with the situation.
>
>
> One of my neighbors has one.
>
> All he has to do is get it to the factory and pay a lot of money and the
> AD will be done.
> The other option is to order a kit and have it installed here 80 -100 man
> hours plus the kit---again lots of bucks.

What ever happen to the concept of product warranty? Seems like it does not
apply to airplanes.

If you buy a TV, and it does not work right, you take it back and the
company fixes it. Works for cars, and other products, too.

So now we have an airplane that does not work safely when operated in a
normal, expected manner. I don't think it is too much to ask to have the
producer of the product repair or modify it to work properly, Too bad that
is not reality (for the usual producer) in the airplane world. The airplane
is defective, but the consumer has to pay (big bucks) for the fix. Don't
manufacturers buy insurance to cover issues like this? They should. Either
that, or self insure. It really burns my ass. This is one circumstance
that perhaps lawyers have a place.

Oh, the manufacturer can't afford it, they don't have high enough product
output to pay for such a thing, bla bla bla....

If it was an auto manufacturer, the big bad government would hold their feet
to the fire.
--
Jim in NC

[vaughn[_2_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> If it was an auto manufacturer, the big bad government would hold their feet
> to the fire.

True, but the reality is that this is NOT a big auto manufacturer and there
are no "deep pockets" to pay for the necessary alterations. The worst situation
would be if a lawsuit forced the manufacturer out of business and 601XLs
everywhere become nothing but expensive lawn ornaments. Far better for the
owners to "pay the freight" so that the manufacturer can stay in business and
support the fleet so that the planes retain some value.

Even at its best, this situation will have a chilling effect on the whole
non-Cessna part of the LSA industry. Now everyone can see how the inevitable
industry "shakeout" of small LSA manufacturers can leave aircraft owners
stranded without support.

Vaughn

[Morgans[_2_]]

"vaughn" > wrote
>
> True, but the reality is that this is NOT a big auto manufacturer and
> there are no "deep pockets" to pay for the necessary alterations.

Yes, I fully understand that this is the reality of the situation. Doesn't
make me like it any better, though.

> The worst situation would be if a lawsuit forced the manufacturer out of
> business and 601XLs everywhere become nothing but expensive lawn
> ornaments. Far better for the owners to "pay the freight" so that the
> manufacturer can stay in business and support the fleet so that the planes
> retain some value.

Unfortunately for the saps holding the bag, but true again. One can at
least hope that the parts for the modifications are made available at cost.
No way should any reputable company make any money on a problem not of the
consumer's doing.

> Even at its best, this situation will have a chilling effect on the
> whole non-Cessna part of the LSA industry. Now everyone can see how the
> inevitable industry "shakeout" of small LSA manuf.acturers can leave
> aircraft owners stranded without support.

I'm not so sure that there will be any shakeout, because of this. I think
everyone in all of general aviation (certified and non certified) allready
knows that they will end up paying more, if they are the holder of
....defective crankshafts, or bad lifters, or bad avionics or... on and on)
whatever problems that a plane they own may have that has to be replaced or
modified.

I was just venting. It isn't fair to pay today's prices for aviation stuff
that is new and should be good to go for a long time, only to find out that
it is necessary to pay a big chunk of change extra, to make it useable. Not
fair at all, but there it is.
--
Jim in NC

[vaughn[_2_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>> Even at its best, this situation will have a chilling effect on the whole
>> non-Cessna part of the LSA industry. Now everyone can see how the inevitable
>> industry "shakeout" of small LSA manuf.acturers can leave aircraft owners
>> stranded without support.
>
> I'm not so sure that there will be any shakeout, because of this.

Oops! I did not mean to imply that there would be shakeout "because of this".
I was talking about the fact that there are a lot of LSA manufacturers. Chances
are, 5 years from now they will not all still be standing. There will be
winners, there will be losers, and there will be a few in between. The way I
understand the LSA regulations, you do *not* want to own an LSA made by a
company that no longer exists.

Vaughn

[Morgans[_2_]]

"vaughn" > wrote

> Oops! I did not mean to imply that there would be shakeout "because of
> this". I was talking about the fact that there are a lot of LSA
> manufacturers. Chances are, 5 years from now they will not all still be
> standing. There will be winners, there will be losers, and there will be
> a few in between. The way I understand the LSA regulations, you do *not*
> want to own an LSA made by a company that no longer exists.

I see.

If it becomes a common thing, I wonder if they will allow some home made
parts, as long as they are suitable quality replacements.

Nah. That would make sense; can't expect that from the FAA. "We're not
happy until you're not happy."
--
Jim in NC

[Ron Wanttaja[_2_]]

vaughn wrote:

> Oops! I did not mean to imply that there would be shakeout "because of this".
> I was talking about the fact that there are a lot of LSA manufacturers. Chances
> are, 5 years from now they will not all still be standing. There will be
> winners, there will be losers, and there will be a few in between. The way I
> understand the LSA regulations, you do *not* want to own an LSA made by a
> company that no longer exists.

You're actually better off, in the pure ownership regard. If the
company goes under, you switch your plane to Experimental LSA and you
can use whatever parts you wish.

It does keep you from renting out the plane or any other commercial use,
if that had been your intent.

Ron Wanttaja