|
|
You're absolutely right, Dale. If I look a little stupid, it's only because I am.
This is a helluva group. I can think of a whole bunch of names that I won't mention, because I know I'll miss two or three out of pure senility, who haven't flown yet or aren't through their 40 hours, who I'd be delighted to confab with in person. Even Al, who brought the subject up, hasn't flown yet. I'd be honored to have him look at my setup before I fly it, and take his every observation very seriously indeed ('course at my present pace, he'll probably be able to fly his rig up here after his first major overhaul).
I think credibility can only be built by consistent success. If enough systems are reviewed by "the group" and succeed (without major problems), We'll be taken seriously by the outside world.
As far as the immediate safety issues are concerned, I would like to see everybody's installation peer reviewed as extensively as possible. I'll not fly, myself, until that happens with my system.
Another two cents.
Jack Ford
Jack Ford
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dale Rogers" <dale.r@cox.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 8:32 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Quality Assurance / Peer Review ( was: Re: Seized 13b ...)
Jack,
Although I agree with you in principle, I don't in the
details. We have a number of very knowledgeable people
in the group, who have not yet brought the fruits of
their expertise into the air. That does not mean their
observations won't be valid. Should more weight be given
to the observations of those who are flying? In most cases,
I would.
Dale
From: "Jack Ford" <jackoford@theofficenet.com>
Date: 2005/05/21 Sat AM 10:39:30 EDT
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Seized 13b - accident prevention
MessageI'd think that a formal organization might need to be in existence for an insurance company to take it seriously.
This may be another step towards making alternative engine installations routine and safe (if there's such a thing as safe). A sort of self-policing association.
Now that it's been brought up (Thanks, Al), I wouldn't think of making a first flight without some experienced eyeballs taking a close looksee at my "perfect" installation. It would be nice to know that the inspectors had at least flown successfully.
My two cents.
Jack Ford (Rank beginner)
----- Original Message ----- From: Russell Duffy
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 3:26 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Seized 13b - accident prevention
Am I way off the mark here? Could/would this work? Are there others out there who would participate as "examiners"? Would you welcome such "look-over" on your project? Do you think it would do any good? I'd like some feedback on this, and then see whether it makes sense to pursue it any further.
Hi Al,
I think this is a noble effort, but I don't see that anything formal needs to be set up. I'd bet that anyone on this list would feel comfortable asking to see someone else's project, or asking to have someone look at theirs.
Now if you could pitch this idea to the insurance companies, for a condition of first flight coverage, or cheaper rates, then you may be onto something.
Cheers,
Rusty (balance gear has arrived)
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
|
|