X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 12:46:56 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail-yh0-f42.google.com ([209.85.213.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.9e) with ESMTPS id 6851656 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 12:44:28 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.213.42; envelope-from=pjdmiller@gmail.com Received: by mail-yh0-f42.google.com with SMTP id f73so464361yha.15 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 09:43:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.236.130.241 with SMTP id k77mr3255931yhi.159.1398789835546; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 09:43:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.1.109] ([68.202.57.70]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id r46sm37591911yhd.29.2014.04.29.09.43.54 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 09:43:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Paul Miller Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BCE17A81-B32D-4CAE-9A62-9BBC3A6111DB" X-Original-Message-Id: <9D18D795-826F-469C-A44E-0DAFBCA6FD2C@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) Subject: Re: [LML] Legacy White Paper X-Original-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 12:43:53 -0400 References: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) --Apple-Mail=_BCE17A81-B32D-4CAE-9A62-9BBC3A6111DB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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" 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. =20 FWIW =20 Jon --Apple-Mail=_BCE17A81-B32D-4CAE-9A62-9BBC3A6111DB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii 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.