Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #50363
From: John Slade <jslade@canardaviation.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Ut-Oh...
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:15:28 -0400
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Hi Rino,
We don't "knock down or kick out" here. You must be thinking of another list where input that doesn't match the "owners" views is strongly resisted.
Here there are no owners and all input is welcome. Even when wrong( which yours certainly isnt), the input tends to generate useful discussion.

>in the process of building and flying ...I have learned more about the PILOT  (me) than building airplanes.
That's true for most of us, I think. In my Piper I used to chug along at whatever altitude was convenient. Yes, I was always keeping watch for a good landing spot "in case", but I wasn't expecting the engine to quit. Now I am. Thankfully it never has, but if it did I'd be ready. You learn from every flight in any airplane, but flying one you built yourself is a whole other learning experience. You KNOW about all the things that can go wrong. I think this knowledge makes me a more cautious pilot. Of course, being able to climb to 10,000' in a few minutes rather than half an hour helps.

Not so much a grain of salt - more a large rock :)
Regards,
John


Rino wrote:
Please don't knock me down or kick me out, I love this list, I learn a lot from the people who write it.  But I want to add my grain of salt.
 
I know that the following belong in another list, not a list that deal with rotary engines.
 
And there is the PILOT.
I believe there are no accident accident, all are forseable and avoidable, why is my unconsious setting me up to that accident.  All I can add is that I have looked into my past accidents and I am convinced my unconsious could have avoided it if it wanted to, why did it happened?
 
All I can say at this time is that in the process of building and flying a Glass Goose I have learned more about the PILOT  (me) than building airplanes.
 
sorry for the diversion
Rino Lacombe
----- Original Message -----
From: Al Wick
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 11:09 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ut-Oh...

Another dead stick landing. Same old causes. Fortunately no fatalities....this time.
 
Let's pretend you are the copilot. You've been flying along for 10 minutes. When the pilot says: "Hey Bob, how about giving me 150 times as much fuel right now."   You'd say:"WHAT?!! You are crazy, that will shut down the engine!"
Pilot:" Oops, my bad. O2 and egt's are normal. My mistake"
 
Does that sound far fetched? Nope. It happens a couple times a year. Often it's a case where the pilot inadvertently drives the ecu to super lean condition. Engines suddenly quits. Let's use your home pc as an example. You tell the pc to delete all files on your hard drive. It recognizes this is most unusual and could be catastrophic. So it says:"Are you sure you want to wipe out hard drive? This could be fatal"
 
Every failure has more than one cause. Yes, the pilot inadvertently flipped the "cold start" switch when he was reaching for his gps. Was it Ed last year who inadvertently rotated the mixture to full lean?  Last year Keith's passenger bumped the ecu mixture knob while getting in the plane. So, yes, Ed, Keith, and Dave all made the same mistakes. They placed a switch capable of shutting down the engine in the wrong area of the instrument panel. End of story? NO!
 
As soon as one of these ECU suppliers adds the "Are you sure?" logic, then all of these failures disappear. Pretty simple logic statement. Actually, there are a whole bunch of ways this can be handled. I had to do this type of programming with industrial plc's because these same "oops" were so common. Think about this. If engine has been running for more than 5 minutes, only allow small mixture changes. Never enough to shut down engine. So let's say that 100 will shut down engine, then we only allow a change of 20 each minute.
 
I think the ECU providers recognize builder error. "Whew! Not MY problem."  They don't ask: "Is there something I can do to save lives?"   If they make these simple changes, then every single plane is no longer sensitive to these common "oops" scenarios. So yes, if Dave moves his switch, HE will be safer. But if the ECU supplier makes this simple programming change, then every single plane will be safer. Real world mistakes will no longer shut down the engine.
 
I want these suppliers to be successful. I want fewer plane crashes. But it's not going to happen unless you guys (privately) encourage these simple changes.
 
This group is making good progress on failure reduction. There are a handful of ecu changes that will really make a difference. Please pursue! Question question question.
 
 
-al wick

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