Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #69874
From: Paul Miller <pjdmiller@gmail.com>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Legacy White Paper
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 12:46:56 -0400
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
Each Legacy is different by the fact each builder is different.  I never subscribed to the notion that each Legacy is a factory conformed original.  Hence, my comment about the variances in each airframe and how tough it is to draw conclusions that encompass all Legacy aircraft.  You obviously agree that modifications to the airframe can have unexpected consequences so the variability has to be taken into account for issues like steps, locking mechanism, latch maintenance, wear and tear.

I just don't believe a checklist is the sole solution in this instance because I don't know that a checklist would have prevented all of those incidents.  It is not clear to me that each incident was simply the pilot forgetting to do something.

You can always contact Josh directly and I can send a picture of the locking mod he suggested be used for retractable steps.  I will suggest that not every Legacy latches and closes exactly the same therefore you already have one source of variability before starting the airplane with or without steps in the equation.

Paul
Legacy
On 2014-04-29, at 12:19 PM, "Jon Socolof" <jsocolof@ershire.com> wrote:

I have trained with Josh and never heard him say this, so maybe we could get the more information. That being said, it would support my point in that the retractable step is a modification to the original design and was not designed by Lancair. The original design is well engineered and sufficient. Builder modifications are a judgment call and may have unintended consequences. Again there is nothing new or unknown here and I fear a report like this may result in the aircraft being unfairly perceived as inherently unsafe.
 
FWIW
 
Jon

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster