X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 07:40:02 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.65] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.10) with ESMTP id 4620669 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 05 Dec 2010 07:02:54 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.65; envelope-from=rtitsworth@mindspring.com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=Bis9QziU+FESM0IFS/EgeyYHgW0upgwvZm0Ane8O8+gkKtSkqTOypzoiFpaEJ9s4; h=Received:From:To:References:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:In-Reply-To:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [71.227.105.188] (helo=X200) by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1PPDIH-000398-LM for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 05 Dec 2010 07:02:17 -0500 From: "Rick Titsworth" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" References: Subject: RE: [LML] Hydraulic hoses X-Original-Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 07:02:18 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <53B7BB2CA711457EA0F79A3828BFE9BD@X200> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0058_01CB944A.5B10A7A0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcuTsyPYYkO1S2HxRGCKl0jn3PL2CgAvIxdA In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994 X-ELNK-Trace: b17f11247b2ac8f0a79dc4b33984cbaa0a9da525759e265498603c0f1ebb584c7a42abdf9d0b3f2a4e7a3108705b577b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 71.227.105.188 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01CB944A.5B10A7A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit George, you must feel strongly about this, otherwise why post it??? I hope this works out well for you and your passengers. As far as I know, it's certainly an experiment - as stated by my adolescent TV hero "to boldly go where no man has gone before". If by chance it doesn't work out well. My observation has been that the NTSB guys are normally very thorough and make it a point to not jump to initial conclusions during their investigations. However, your explanation may save them lots of trouble attempting to determine the root cause. Would you feel comfortable including a picture of the degraded/repaired hoses in your std passenger briefing? Probably only fair to them. My .02 p.s. You're right your current hoses have lasted 16 years thus far... I'm curious what do you think/expect the service life of your hoses to be? 2 more yrs, 10 more yrs, Indefinite? When will you replace them, if ever? How will you know it's time? What was different about the hoses you did decide to replace? Did they have fewer service house, fewer landings, etc? Are you / have you done any testing on your current hoses (other than visual inspection and/or just continuing to fly them)? Do you have any external research/specifications you're referencing (please share)? Did you do any testing on the hoses your removed? What testing did you perhaps do on your new home-made hoses? Did you use calibrated testing equipment? How will you know if/when you were wrong? _____ From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of George Shattuck Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 8:00 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Hydraulic hoses As I have previously posted, the outer, protective rubber coating on most of my hydraulic hoses, after 16 years and 1350 flight hours, have begun to dry, crack and flake off. The rubber covering is at most 3/64th inches thick and clearly, to me, is on the hose to provide protection from chafing or debris thrown up from tires during ground operations. I have replaced the deteriorated rubber covering on the hoses in the main wheel wells with a product I purchased through Aircraft Spruce, called "Rescue Tape." It is wonderful stuff and is much more sturdy than the original rubber. I also used that tape on a couple hoses under the seats. I decided to replace a few hoses just to get back in the business of building again and the attached picture is an example of one hose I produced. I am not going to send my hoses off to Sacramento Sky Ranch for re-make, as a couple responders so sternly suggested. I'm a homebuilder thank you very much, and I will make my own hoses. I bought the hose and couplings from A/C Spruce. There is nothing to suggest to me that my airplane is not airworthy, as Brent Ragan would suggest. If that were true it should have been un-airworthy at the first sign of a deteriorated hose covering, which I began noticing some months ago. I believe this to be an ongoing maintenance requirement and should be addressed as such. I assume there will be the usual comments on the hydraulic hose situation, which I and other Lancair flyers will welcome. George Shattuck LNC2, 1350 flt. hrs. +/- ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01CB944A.5B10A7A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

George, you must feel strongly = about this, otherwise why post it???

 

I hope this works out well for you = and your passengers.

As far as I know, it’s = certainly an experiment – as stated by my adolescent TV hero “to boldly = go where no man has gone before”.

 

If by chance it doesn’t work = out well…

My observation has been that the = NTSB guys are normally very thorough and make it a point to not jump to initial = conclusions during their investigations.

However, your explanation may save = them lots of trouble attempting to determine the root = cause.

 

Would you feel comfortable = including a picture of the degraded/repaired hoses in your std passenger briefing? =  Probably only fair to them.

 

My .02

 

p.s.

 

You’re right your current = hoses have lasted 16 years thus far...  I’m curious what do you = think/expect the service life of your hoses to be?  2 more yrs, 10 more yrs, = Indefinite?  When will you replace them, if ever?  How will you know it’s = time?  What was different about the hoses you did decide to replace?  Did they = have fewer service house, fewer landings, etc?

 

Are you / have you done any testing = on your current hoses (other than visual inspection and/or just continuing = to fly them)?  Do you have any external research/specifications = you’re referencing (please share)?  Did you do any testing on the hoses = your removed?  What testing did you perhaps do on your new home-made = hoses?  Did you use calibrated testing equipment?

 

How will you know if/when you were = wrong?

 

 

From: = Lancair Mailing List = [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of George Shattuck
Sent: Saturday, December = 04, 2010 8:00 AM
To: = lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Hydraulic = hoses

 

As I have previously posted, the outer, = protective rubber coating on most of my hydraulic hoses, after 16 years and 1350 = flight hours, have begun to dry, crack and flake off.  The rubber = covering is at most 3/64th inches thick and clearly, to me, is on the hose to provide protection from chafing or debris thrown up from tires = during ground operations.

 

I have replaced the deteriorated rubber covering on = the hoses in the main wheel wells with a product I purchased through = Aircraft Spruce, called "Rescue Tape."  It is wonderful stuff and is much = more sturdy than the original rubber.  I also used that tape on a couple = hoses under the seats.

 

I decided to replace a few hoses just to get back in = the business of building again and the attached picture is an example of one = hose I produced.  I am not going to send my hoses off to Sacramento Sky Ranch for re-make, as a couple responders so sternly = suggested.  I'm a homebuilder thank you very much, and I will make my own = hoses.  I bought the hose and couplings from A/C = Spruce.

 

There is nothing to suggest to me that my airplane is = not airworthy, as Brent Ragan would suggest.  If that were true it = should have been un-airworthy at the first sign of a deteriorated hose covering, = which I began noticing some months ago.  I believe this to be an ongoing maintenance requirement and should be addressed as such.  =

 

I assume there will be the usual comments on the = hydraulic hose situation, which I and other Lancair flyers will = welcome.

 

George Shattuck

LNC2, 1350 flt. hrs. +/-

------=_NextPart_000_0058_01CB944A.5B10A7A0--