 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kellym
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Sun Lakes AZ
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:18 pm Post subject: Alternate fuel and ignition |
 |
|
It doesn't really matter what precipitates the crash. It appears that
the RV-10 doesn't have such a good deadstick landing record. (how many
practice power off landings from more than 1/2 mile from the runway?)
Whether it is the pilot's fault, the engine or electrics fault or the
ass-phalt, the result is the same. There is a reason homebuilt aircraft
do not have as good an accident record as production aircraft. We each
have to make choices as to how far we deviate from plans or proven
aircraft products. There is a good record of some products making it
from experimental to certified. Unfortunately probably 3-4 times that
number do not turn our as successes, vanish from the scene.
Unfortunately some of those failures spill blood.
Kelly
On 4/22/2015 7:50 PM, Justin Jones wrote:
| Quote: | I'm sorry to hear that Phillip. I am always interested in causal
factors in aviation accident because we have a duty to learn from the
mistakes of others. Do you have any specific lessons learned that you
would like to share with the rest of us? Were any of these accidents
employing the use of the EFII system specifically? Were they
automotive engines adapted for aviation use?
Thanks for sharing lessons learned.
Justin
On Apr 22, 2015, at 18:26, Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com
<mailto:philperry9(at)gmail.com>> wrote:
> Unfortunately for me, 4 dead friends in three accidents is fact. Not
> opinion.
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Rocketman1988 <Rocketman(at)etczone.com
> <mailto:Rocketman(at)etczone.com>> wrote:
>
>
> <Rocketman(at)etczone.com <mailto:Rocketman(at)etczone.com>>
>
> The "tractor engine" was meant as a comparison to the technology
> of the ancient times but VW works, too.
>
> Like I said before, it's like discussing politics or religion.
> Everyone has their own OPINION, and each is entitled to it. It
> doesn't make any opinion correct or incorrect but it does serve
> to circulate more information...and that is good.
>
> Still going with the EFII system 
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=441145#441145
>
> ===========
> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ===========
> FORUMS -
> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===========
> b Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===========
>
>
> *
>
> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> //forums.matronics.com
> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> *
*
*
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-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?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob Turner
Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Posts: 885
Location: Castro Valley, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 9:51 pm Post subject: Re: Alternate fuel and ignition |
|
|
| Kellym wrote: | It doesn't really matter what precipitates the crash. It appears that
the RV-10 doesn't have such a good deadstick landing record.
*
|
[/quote]
As far as I know there have been zero fatalities where RV10's were dead-sticked to the ground under control, in some cases in less than desirable terrain. The very first, and now latest, fatal accidents were pilots stalling 50 feet up. This speaks well of the airframe; perhaps not so well of the pilots.
| | - The Matronics RV10-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?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmjones2000(at)mindspring
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:19 pm Post subject: Alternate fuel and ignition |
|
|
As an aviation professional with a degree in aviation safety and a career in aviation I stand with many many other aviation safety professionals when saying it absolutely matters what precipitates the crash. If it didn't matter, the NTSB wouldn't exist and we would all still be making the same mistakes Orville and Wilbur made. We must learn from the mistakes of others. Whether it's the DC-10 that crashed in Iowa after a previously-considered impossible event of the loss of all three hydraulic systems, the crash of TWA-800, or the RV-10 N62DN that crashed in Ohio, as aviation professionals, enthusiasts, and builders we must be vigilant of mistakes that can be made on all levels. We don't know what we don't know, but we can learn from what others didn't know. We have made it this far in aviation by progressively learning from everyone's mistakes and have a duty to continue doing so.
Respectfully,
Justin
| Quote: | On Apr 22, 2015, at 19:15, Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> wrote:
It doesn't really matter what precipitates the crash. It appears that the RV-10 doesn't have such a good deadstick landing record. (how many practice power off landings from more than 1/2 mile from the runway?) Whether it is the pilot's fault, the engine or electrics fault or the ass-phalt, the result is the same. There is a reason homebuilt aircraft do not have as good an accident record as production aircraft. We each have to make choices as to how far we deviate from plans or proven aircraft products. There is a good record of some products making it from experimental to certified. Unfortunately probably 3-4 times that number do not turn our as successes, vanish from the scene. Unfortunately some of those failures spill blood.
Kelly
> On 4/22/2015 7:50 PM, Justin Jones wrote:
> I'm sorry to hear that Phillip. I am always interested in causal factors in aviation accident because we have a duty to learn from the mistakes of others. Do you have any specific lessons learned that you would like to share with the rest of us? Were any of these accidents employing the use of the EFII system specifically? Were they automotive engines adapted for aviation use?
>
> Thanks for sharing lessons learned.
>
> Justin
>
>
>> On Apr 22, 2015, at 18:26, Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com <mailto:philperry9(at)gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately for me, 4 dead friends in three accidents is fact. Not opinion.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Rocketman1988 <Rocketman(at)etczone.com <mailto:Rocketman(at)etczone.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> <Rocketman(at)etczone.com <mailto:Rocketman(at)etczone.com>>
>>
>> The "tractor engine" was meant as a comparison to the technology
>> of the ancient times but VW works, too.
>>
>> Like I said before, it's like discussing politics or religion. Everyone has their own OPINION, and each is entitled to it. It
>> doesn't make any opinion correct or incorrect but it does serve
>> to circulate more information...and that is good.
>>
>> Still going with the EFII system
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=441145#441145
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ===========
>> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ===========
>> FORUMS -
>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ===========
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ===========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> //forums.matronics.com
>> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>
>> *
> *
>
>
> *
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-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?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rv10flyer(at)live.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2015 6:58 am Post subject: Alternate fuel and ignition |
|
|
"As far as I know there have been zero fatalities where RV10's were
dead-sticked to the ground under control, in some cases in less than
desirable terrain. "
To your point Bob-
http://www.aviationinspector.com/2013/01/pilot-rescued-in-rv-10-plane-crash-near-julian/
Oil connector was loose- lost oil pressure. took it to the mountainous
terrain and walked away.
--
| | - The Matronics RV10-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?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rocketman1988
Joined: 21 Jun 2012
Posts: 63
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:01 am Post subject: Re: Alternate fuel and ignition |
|
|
"There is a reason homebuilt aircraft
do not have as good an accident record as production aircraft. We each
have to make choices as to how far we deviate from plans or proven
aircraft products. There is a good record of some products making it
from experimental to certified."
I hope you are not insinuating that just because parts are "certified" that they are necessarily better.
Case in point: Throttle cable on 1957 Cessna 172 needed to be replaced due to the failure of the cable about 8 inches from the carb end. As the throttle arm is moved the cable moves through an arc and over time the cable fails. Accordingly, the cable was being replaced but the FAA wanted a "certified" replacement (new old stock), which was destined to fail in the same way. ACS, however, has an "experimental" version of the cable, redesigned with a semi flexible joint at the failure location, teflon lined, mil-spec tested, for less than half the price.
Which is "better"?
| | - The Matronics RV10-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?RV10-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
