Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Subaru down

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

bjudge(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 12:15 pm Post subject: Subaru down

Virtual RV land:

It seems an Eggenfeller had a forced landing.  The blurb pasted in at

the bottom is from Vans first flight web page.



My condolences to Roger Evenson, I really am sorry about what

happened.  Please don't take offense at my opinions.



It breaks my heart to hear about these incidents.  Anyone seriously

considering these engines needs to think long and hard about the

accident rate associated with these engines.



I helped a builder who had serious trouble keeping his CHT's down on a

garden variety lyc 360 RV-7.  He was running nearly 450 F on climb

out.  He made some changes and everything is in line now.  This is a

well defined installation with step by step instructions but the

builder still had issues that could have led to failure.



I'm not being critical of this builder but my point is that even with

a well defined off the shelf installation there are many pitfalls that

you have to be careful of.  With a completely new design there going

to be many lessons learned that will come out only when the design

sees actual service.  In short the "right" way to run and install the

Subaru still is unknown, if it was then the guy at the bottom of this

message wouldn't be building another plane right now.



There are people that are well suited to establishing new designs and

there are people who want to fly blissfully planes places.



I know it is closed minded and counter to the mentality of most of us

experimental builders but I don't see the risk reward benefit in using

the Subaru engine compared to an IO-360 with electronic ignition.



Bill Judge

N84WJ, RV-8 210 hrs.

rv-8.blogspot.com



From: Roger Evenson

 To: webmaster(at)vansaircraft.com

 Subject: first flight report

 Date sent: Mon, 03 Mar 2008



RV Grin



With Darwin Barrie and Glenn Brasch flying chase in Darwin's RV7, the

first flight for 394RS occurred on 5/2/07 at KRYN, Tucson, Arizona.

This "farm tractor", a 9A (90534) was powered by a supercharged,

Eggenfellner EJ-25. First flight was a fabulous experience and a very

sweet ride. Many thanks to my wife Susie, bucking buddy Glenn, tech

counselor Gil Alexander, Charles Wilhite, Dan Watters and many others.

These things can't be built without lots of support.



RV Frown



With 50 hours on the Hobbs, and shortly after takeoff on 6/29/07, an

overboost (40" MAP) resulted in loss of engine power, and an

off-airport landing. Though the mains touched down on solid desert,

they soon encountered a mound of soft earth and a root which threw the

plane forward. A very quick nose-over followed. I thank the Lord (and

Van's design) for getting out with only a scratch. Charles' composite

canopy also did it's job, absorbing lots of energy. Now building a 7A

and looking forward to another first flight.



        Roger Evenson

        [ revenson at comcast.net ]

khorton01(at)rogers.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 1:02 pm Post subject: Subaru down

On 5 Mar 2008, at 15:11, Bill Judge wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 I know it is closed minded and counter to the mentality of most of us

 experimental builders but I don't see the risk reward benefit in using

 the Subaru engine compared to an IO-360 with electronic ignition.




	


I agree that people installing alternate engines or propellers need  

to have a realistic understanding of the increased risks they are  

undertaking.  But, if they really do understand those risks, it is a  

bit presumpstious of us to try to tell them to install a Lycoming  

instead.  After all, the accident rate during the flight test phase  

on RVs is quite a bit higher than the first 40 hours that a new owner  

does in his Cessna.  If we are really concerned about risk, why  

aren't we all flying Cessnas?



--

Kevin Horton

RV-8 (Finishing Kit)

Ottawa, Canada

http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8

tracy(at)rotaryaviation.c
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 1:42 pm Post subject: Subaru down

All true Bill,

    I spend about as much time trying to talk builders out of alternative engines (even the one I use) as I do helping them with advice on how to install them.  

  

 It's very amusing to read the various alternative engine company websites that talk about their proven reliability, numbers sold (total fiction usually) and how you can fly your loved ones with complete confidence when using their products.  IMO, if you install an alternative engine in your airplane, you are a test pilot flying what truly is an experimental aircraft in every sense of the word.

   

 I usually don't say this to builders who call me because I don't want them to think I'm insulting them but being on an open forum makes it easier. 

  

  FWIW,  If you have to ask someone if you should put an alternative engine in your plane, you shouldn't.

  

 If it's a good idea for you, you don't have to ask and no one could possibly talk you out of it. 

   

Tracy Crook

 Mazda 13B rotary powered RV-4, 20B powered RV-8

  



 On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Bill Judge <bjudge(at)gmail.com (bjudge(at)gmail.com)> wrote:

 [quote]--> RV-List message posted by: "Bill Judge" <bjudge(at)gmail.com (bjudge(at)gmail.com)>

 

Virtual RV land:

It seems an Eggenfeller had a forced landing.  The blurb pasted in at

the bottom is from Vans first flight web page.



My condolences to Roger Evenson, I really am sorry about what

happened.  Please don't take offense at my opinions.

 

It breaks my heart to hear about these incidents.  Anyone seriously

considering these engines needs to think long and hard about the

accident rate associated with these engines.



I helped a builder who had serious trouble keeping his CHT's down on a

 garden variety lyc 360 RV-7.  He was running nearly 450 F on climb

out.  He made some changes and everything is in line now.  This is a

well defined installation with step by step instructions but the

builder still had issues that could have led to failure.

 

I'm not being critical of this builder but my point is that even with

a well defined off the shelf installation there are many pitfalls that

you have to be careful of.  With a completely new design there going

 to be many lessons learned that will come out only when the design

sees actual service.  In short the "right" way to run and install the

Subaru still is unknown, if it was then the guy at the bottom of this

 message wouldn't be building another plane right now.



There are people that are well suited to establishing new designs and

there are people who want to fly blissfully planes places.



I know it is closed minded and counter to the mentality of most of us

 experimental builders but I don't see the risk reward benefit in using

the Subaru engine compared to an IO-360 with electronic ignition.



Bill Judge

N84WJ, RV-8 210 hrs.

rv-8.blogspot.com

 

From: Roger Evenson

 To: webmaster(at)vansaircraft.com (webmaster(at)vansaircraft.com)

 Subject: first flight report

 Date sent: Mon, 03 Mar 2008



RV Grin



With Darwin Barrie and Glenn Brasch flying chase in Darwin's RV7, the

 first flight for 394RS occurred on 5/2/07 at KRYN, Tucson, Arizona.

This "farm tractor", a 9A (90534) was powered by a supercharged,

Eggenfellner EJ-25. First flight was a fabulous experience and a very

 sweet ride. Many thanks to my wife Susie, bucking buddy Glenn, tech

counselor Gil Alexander, Charles Wilhite, Dan Watters and many others.

These things can't be built without lots of support.



RV Frown

 

With 50 hours on the Hobbs, and shortly after takeoff on 6/29/07, an

overboost (40" MAP) resulted in loss of engine power, and an

off-airport landing. Though the mains touched down on solid desert,

they soon encountered a mound of soft earth and a root which threw the

 plane forward. A very quick nose-over followed. I thank the Lord (and

Van's design) for getting out with only a scratch. Charles' composite

canopy also did it's job, absorbing lots of energy. Now building a 7A

  [quote][b]

ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 1:59 pm Post subject: Subaru down

> I agree that people installing alternate engines or propellers need  

 	  Quote: 	
		   to have a realistic understanding of the increased risks they are  

 undertaking.  But, if they really do understand those risks, it is a  

 bit presumpstious of us to try to tell them to install a Lycoming  

 instead.  After all, the accident rate during the flight test phase  

 on RVs is quite a bit higher than the first 40 hours that a new owner  

 does in his Cessna.  If we are really concerned about risk, why  

 aren't we all flying Cessnas?


	


Do they understand the risk or is it some infatuation with an auto

conversion and cheaper auto fuel?  Was the RV-10 that crashed

with one fatality using an auto engine?



I will admit that I am biased against some things and one is auto

engines in aircraft.  I won't fly in one or buy one.  



Ron Lee

pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:31 pm Post subject: Subaru down

My 2 pennies.  YMMV



The cause of this accident would have been the same if it had occurred 

on a turboed Lycosaur.  The engine over boosted due to a failure of 

something related to the turbo.  What that was, I don't know ...... 

wastegate malfunction???  I don't know much about the specifics of the 

Subaru turbo system so someone more knowledgeable than me will have to 

cover that ground.



Indicting alternate engines just because of a system failure is like not 

using tires on the car because they blow out sometimes.

Crap happens ..... I've had two Lycosaurs that let me down.  Not one 

'alternative engine' has done that.  But having said all that, my -10 

will have a IO-540 up front.  Not because I'm down on alternative 

engines ...... I just don't want to do all the work to put something 

else up there.

Linn

do not archive

rv8a2001(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:19 pm Post subject: Subaru down

I monitor the Eggenfelner E-mail list. He stated this accident happened right after a non Eggenfelener ignition and injection system was installed.



 

Scott

RV-8a Lycoming!



---

Bill Schlatterer

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 195

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:47 pm Post subject: Subaru down

Kevin Horton said,.. "If we are really concerned about risk, why aren't we

all flying Cessnas? "



Answer:   Risk versus Reward,.......  We all think the Reward outweighs the

Risk,...not that there isn't any!  Kinda like the stock market but we're

betting our butts and not our buns 



Bill S

7a wannabe flying soon



--

mike109g6(at)insideconnec
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:19 pm Post subject: Subaru down

Whatever happened to the Honda piston A/C engine?  I bet that if they were 

to manufacture it, that they'd have lines of people at the door.  Most would 

be Lyco owners.  I'd be one of the first.

Mike H

do not archive

---

steveadams

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 191

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:29 am Post subject: Re: Subaru down

Shoot me, but this whole auto conversion thing is still in the snake oil stage. Everyone wants something better than the lycoming and Continental offerings, and people tend to see what they want to see and ignore or minimize the rest. It is laudable that some want to be a part of developing the dream of a more modern, consistently reliable aircraft engine; but pretending that that engine is available today in the 120HP and up range is wishful thinking at best and approaches delusional at worst. So I say good luck and thank you to those doing the R+D with these engines, because someday due to your hard work and acceptance of the risk, we will all benefit. Just don't pretend that you are not participating in the R+D of an as yet unproven technology.

n801bh(at)netzero.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:30 am Post subject: Subaru down

We don't pretend Dr..... There is an 'EXPERIMENTAL"decal on our planes.. Remember. ?

Ben Haas

N801BH

www.haaspowerair.com



-- "steveadams" <dr_steve_adams(at)yahoo.com> wrote:

--> RV-List message posted by: "steveadams" <dr_steve_adams(at)yahoo.com>



Shoot me, but this whole auto conversion thing is still in the snake oil stage. Everyone wants something better than the lycoming and Continental offerings, and people tend to see what they want to see and ignore or minimize the rest. It is laudable that some want to be a part of developing the dream of a more modern, consistently reliable aircraft engine; but pretending that that engine is available today in the 120HP and up range is wishful thinking at best and approaches delusional at worst. So I say good luck and thank you to those doing the R+D with these engines, because someday due to your hard work and acceptance of the risk, we will all benefit. Just don't pretend that you are not participating in the R+D of an as yet unproven technology.





Read this topic online here:



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php================================================================================================================================================                       -Matt ==========================================

 



_____________________________________________________________

Click here for free information on exciting leadership programs.

   [quote][b]

steveadams

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 191

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:33 am Post subject: Re: Subaru down

 	  Quote: 	
		  We don't pretend Dr..... There is an 'EXPERIMENTAL"decal on our planes.. Remember. ?

Ben Haas

N801BH

www.haaspowerair.com

	




So does spaceship one, but I think anyone flying spaceship one realizes that his level of experimentation is a bit more than someone flying in a stock RV. I don't believe some builders (and their passengers) of planes with auto conversions have this same level of realization.

tracy(at)rotaryaviation.c
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:22 am Post subject: Subaru down

My guess is that if you are Honda's CEO, the market for piston aircraft engines looks smaller than what they make in motorcycle accessories.  He wants the liability that goes along with aircraft for that!? 

  

 Tracy Crook

 On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:15 AM, mike humphrey <mike109g6(at)insideconnect.net (mike109g6(at)insideconnect.net)> wrote:

 [quote]--> RV-List message posted by: "mike humphrey" <mike109g6(at)insideconnect.net (mike109g6(at)insideconnect.net)>

 

Whatever happened to the Honda piston A/C engine?  I bet that if they were

to manufacture it, that they'd have lines of people at the door.  Most would

be Lyco owners.  I'd be one of the first.

Mike H

 do not archive

 ---

JFLEISC(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:55 pm Post subject: Subaru down

I have no issue with the highly subjective concept of “risk” when it  comes to using automotive engines in experimental aircraft. My experience with  an automotive powered aircraft, however, was not what I expected. I owned a  Sonerai, (VW powered) and admittedly it was the least expensive dollar per hour  plane I ever flew. I was not the original builder so I could not get a  repairman’s certificate. Issue 1; I had a difficult time trying to find an  A&P who would sign it off each year only because they weren’t “familiar”  with anything not Cont or Lyc. The ones that would sign seemed more like  rapists. Issue 2; Some insurance people I talked to back then didn’t want to  hear about airplanes without “airplane” engines. Issue 3; When I eventually went  to sell it I found I had a limited customer base because of Issues 1 and 2.  Issue 4; A builder can save a chunk of money by using alternative power plants  however “building” can be addictive and eventually you have to face the fact  that some day you may want something “newer”, “faster”, etc and will be looking  at selling. Odds are that what you saved in the beginning will be lost at sale  due to Issues 1, 2, and 3.  

        �    Considering the investment I now have in my Lyc RV-4 I prefer to have  something I can liquidate quickly and equitably now that I am at an age where  each class III (God forbid) may be my last. 

  

Jim 

  

 



It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance.

  [quote][b]

tracy(at)rotaryaviation.c
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:49 am Post subject: Subaru down

Good points Jim.  I plan to be buried with my rotary powered RVs so it wasn't a factor <GGG> 

  

 Tracy

 On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:51 PM, <JFLEISC(at)aol.com (JFLEISC(at)aol.com)> wrote:

 [quote]   

I have no issue with the highly subjective concept of "risk" when it comes to using automotive engines in experimental aircraft. My experience with an automotive powered aircraft, however, was not what I expected. I owned a Sonerai, (VW powered) and admittedly it was the least expensive dollar per hour plane I ever flew. I was not the original builder so I could not get a repairman's certificate. Issue 1; I had a difficult time trying to find an A&P who would sign it off each year only because they weren't "familiar" with anything not Cont or Lyc. The ones that would sign seemed more like rapists. Issue 2; Some insurance people I talked to back then didn't want to hear about airplanes without "airplane" engines. Issue 3; When I eventually went to sell it I found I had a limited customer base because of Issues 1 and 2. Issue 4; A builder can save a chunk of money by using alternative power plants however "building" can be addictive and eventually you have to face the fact that some day you may want something "newer", "faster", etc and will be looking at selling. Odds are that what you saved in the beginning will be lost at sale due to Issues 1, 2, and 3.   

          � Considering the investment I now have in my Lyc RV-4 I prefer to have something I can liquidate quickly and equitably now that I am at an age where each class III (God forbid) may be my last.  

  

Jim 

  

 



   It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance.

  	  Quote: 	
		  



t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List

ttp://forums.matronics.com

_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	


[b]

Ed Anderson

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 475

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 4:47 am Post subject: Subaru down

Your right, Jim.   No question (in my mind) that an  RV powered by a alternative engine would have less resale value.  However,  keep in mind that there could be a $10,000- $20,000 cost difference in the  engine cost  alone - so, I would not expect to get as high a resale  value (even if the alternative engine installation is perfect) as I simply do  not have as much engine money in it.  

  

 I think more to the point might be the difficulty of selling  it due to perception of risks, difficulty of acquiring insurance (I've had none,  but others have), and perhaps not being able to find an A&E to sign off  on the conditional inspections if you are not the original builder.

  

 I think most if not all alternative engine  enthusiasts are aware of these factors - resale value is simply not a major  factor - the challenge of the project is probably what appeals to  most.

  

 Ed

 [quote]   ---

_________________
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson@carolina.rr.com

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

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