|
Kevin,
in regards to John Danver's crash - there was more than 1 thing wrong
a) with the plane
b) with his airman ship for this specific flight
a) It is no secret that the tank selector "control access" was awkward
AND rusted (obviously there was a Vis-Grip on it to be able to move it at
all)
Though it was the selector the plans are calling for, there was probably
never any maintenance done to it.
The location of the selector is of no concern ( ... other than preferred
location for different reasons), but the location of the selector CONTROL is
very important.
As mentioned before: torque tube, push/pull cable, bowden-cables whatever
makes it move. Certainly keeping it MOVABLE is another part of the game.
Not to critize John Denver's airmanship in general - he was obviously an
accomplished aviator - BUT for this specific flight and leading up to it, he
showed less then perfection, rather negligence:
a) If you get into a new aircraft (as in never been in that specific
airframe), first thing is to get familiar with at least the essential functions
- fuel shut off being one.
b) IF certain functions are different than in same type/model airframes you
try them out - move them fro from your PIC position - if he would have done that
he would have found out that something doesn't work there.
c) I understand John was asked if he needed fuel on 2 previous stops and he
declined, thinking he can "make it" with the remaining fuel.
John of all had no reason to scrounge - so WHY not put in as much fuel as
you can carry at every occasion possible??
Again, nothing personal against John, he seemed to be a very nice and
likeable guy, but I think it is a wrong conclusion to blame a certain
airframe/installation/etc. for what is basically a gross pilot error.
As a side note: We have a similar thing around my work area at this time:
A good ol' boy (actually a really nice guy!) crashed and died, because he
was constantly flying with the low fuel light on!!
Short flights (2-3 nm), wanted to maximize External Load capacity and was
flying the MD-500 on TIME rather than fuel indication!! ( no more than 20 min of
fuel on take-off....)
Cynical thing was that he had two 55-gallon drums with fuel
hanging underneath when he ran out of fuel!
Now he was made into a martyr and semi-hero! Wrong move!
TJ
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2006 12:25
AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: gauges
I find it interesting that in regards
to fuel in the cockpit that the general consensus seems to be the opposite of
what all RVs use, i.e.. low and high pressure lines in the cockpit. I
would guess that Van gave his design a bit of a thought, considering the
millions of dollars he risks in lawsuits, and has his proof with thousands of
planes flying without problems. it is my understanding that john Denver
had a supposedly safe "no fuel in the cockpit" system which ignored the
practical aspect of being easy to use. I do recognize that it would be
difficult in an RV to get fuel from the wings to the engine without going thru
the cockpit, but with, what, 4000+ planes flying, is this a perceived problem,
or a real one? some guys squeezed fuel pumps between the wing and the
fuse, but you still have to get thru the firewall. what scared me was
the T-craft, with that tank up there behind the panel.. my trainer plane
leaked a bit, too.
I feel the same way about oil pressure
gauges. typically you've got a line to the sender or the gauge.(I mostly
see them mounted on the firewall, not the engine block) people think
"plastic" is no good, but I don't see mine fatiguing. some guys have
"plastic" brake lines, some use AL, and some only use s/s lines. my only
experience so far with failure has been an electrical failure (alt shut down
after hour of peak demands and battery had dropped to 8 volts) in which case I
had no tach (had switched it to elec after drive shaft probs), fuel gauges,
oil temp, but I did have oil pressure and fuel pressure, altimeter, A/S
etc..... I was also glad that I had listened to Jeff rose and kept one
magneto (I was over crater lake in the cascade mtns. at the time).
so if you decide to go all electric, many do, remember it also needs
electric to run. same with EFIS, no CPU, no display.
kevin
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 8:31
PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: gauges
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 9:17
PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: gauges
Some DAR's require that you have a valve and can
reach it with your seat belt on. I assume an electric one, as Ed
mentioned would also do.
JohnD
The control valve could be outside the cockpit and operated by a dash
mounted pointer with a long aluminum tube shaft through the firewall to
the valve.
LYnn E. Hanover
Speaking of fuel valves, the original Cozy plans
call for a manual selector valve mounted between the pilot and
co-pilot with lines up to the seat-back and then to the engine. This setup
has several connections in the cockpit that can leak.
As far as a fuel shut off valve, I don't plan on
using one, just turn off the fuel pumps. For maintenance I plan on ball
valves out of the tank (ahead of the sump tank) and these could be
remotely operated.
Thanks to all for the responses on the gauges
questions. I found some sources for the VDO units and will look at
the suggested ones also.
Any suggestions on water pressure gauge senders?
Can't find any yet.
Wendell
|