X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.121] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.4) with ESMTP id 4166355 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:37:49 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.121; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Return-Path: X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=e9s2GbXmh9EA:10 a=ayC55rCoAAAA:8 a=arxwEM4EAAAA:8 a=QdXCYpuVAAAA:8 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=ekHE3smAAAAA:20 a=UretUmmEAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=NoAKp6exAAAA:8 a=nUuTZ29dAAAA:8 a=xYpE-TkmOogEmZlhdfsA:9 a=aU21PX7mz72ItH40euwA:7 a=WJb98GKoEGysPuDIg3jxZ4Md_RsA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=1vhyWl4Y8LcA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=B0cvAcWxpcAA:10 a=UambPfyrHoNyPNRP:21 a=b-AbhIXYtKo-X3Eu:21 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=0rCL3CpIeZQQ2gFT9r0A:9 a=uJ6XaAZfT55hFvE9ODMA:7 a=77cFdjo85HPS2z9zQgiHs4KIcWcA:4 a=rGjaW-Pxa7ixqnLL:21 a=M0yhrMXNzRoViUvN:21 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 75.191.186.236 Received: from [75.191.186.236] ([75.191.186.236:1106] helo=computername) by cdptpa-oedge02.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.39 r()) with ESMTP id B5/9E-22814-8245E9B4; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:37:12 +0000 From: "Ed Anderson" Message-ID: To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: Civil Discourse was : [FlyRotary] Re: Ut-Oh... Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:37:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01CAC433.DB203E20" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcrEUACZiMVv0X5ORzO9TvDSiLxMgwAArTKA In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01CAC433.DB203E20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rino, On this list we may (or may not) agree with each other about a point - however, we expect any debate to remain civil and about the topic at hand and not egos or personalities. On this list, we are all here for the same reason - to exchange, information, data, ideas, experiences, etc all in the hopes of helping the next guy rolling down the runway to a better, safer flight. Arguments stand on their own merit not because someone said so. If your argument/hypothesis is believe to be ill formed, incorrect or misleading then you can expect someone (or many {:>)) to ask you to clarify or otherwise challenge you on it.. On the other hand, no one should be reluctant to express their viewpoint or raise a question even if its not perfectedly stated. Often times, the process that occurs here leads from a nebulous hypothesis that gets debated until it narrows down to something meaningful. I doubt if there is a mistake I have not made - hell, I even have a certificate from Real World Solutions attesting to it {:>). Fortunately, I have thus far managed a graceful recovery from my stupidity, inattention or smug attitude of thinking I know it. Even with a perfect aircraft installation (if there is any such thing), you still have human error, distraction, etc which can and do cause things to go wrong. I need not point out the number of certified aircraft that have met tragic ends to make my point. We are engaged in a "hobby" that entails risks - if anyone thinks otherwise, then they had better reconsider. I personally do not like the accelerated heart rate nor stomach tightening sensation when the engine goes quite - it really, really bothers me. So I take what I consider reasonable precautions based on my risk profile - which may not be your risk profile. But, have no illusions - if the engine can go quite on those certified birds with 10s of thousands of hours and million of dollars of test and development - it can certainly happen to our projects. But, your question or viewpoint just might save some guys bacon - and it might be mine. So have no hesitancy about stating your view - just keep it civil and you'll never have a problem on this list - now you may or may not get anybody to agree with you - but that is a different horse {:>). Ed Ed Anderson Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC eanderson@carolina.rr.com http://www.andersonee.com http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html http://www.flyrotary.com/ http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW http://www.rotaryaviation.com/Rotorhead%20Truth.htm _____ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Rino Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 10:58 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ut-Oh... 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 To: Rotary motors in aircraft 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 __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3267 (20080714) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01CAC433.DB203E20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Rino,

 

On this list we may (or may not) = agree with each other about a point – however, we expect any debate to = remain civil and about the topic at hand and not egos or personalities.  = On this list,  we are all here for the same reason – to exchange, information, data, ideas, experiences, etc all in the hopes of helping = the next guy rolling down the runway to a better, safer flight.  Arguments = stand on their own merit not because someone said so.  If your = argument/hypothesis is believe to be ill formed, incorrect or misleading then you can expect someone (or many {:>)) to ask you to clarify or otherwise challenge = you on it..

 

On the other hand, no one should be reluctant to express their viewpoint or raise a question even if its not perfectedly stated.  Often times, the process that occurs here = leads from a nebulous hypothesis that gets debated until it narrows down to = something meaningful.

 

I doubt if there is a mistake I = have not made – hell, I even have a certificate from Real World Solutions = attesting to it {:>).  Fortunately, I have thus far managed a graceful = recovery from my stupidity, inattention or smug attitude of thinking I know = it.  Even with a perfect aircraft installation (if there is any such thing), = you still have human error, distraction, etc which can and do cause things = to go wrong.   I need not point out the number of certified aircraft = that have met tragic ends to make my point.  =

 

We are engaged in a = “hobby” that entails risks – if anyone thinks otherwise, then they had = better reconsider.  I personally do not like the accelerated heart rate = nor stomach tightening sensation when the engine goes quite – it really, = really bothers me.  So I take what I consider reasonable precautions based = on my risk profile – which may not be your risk profile. But, have no = illusions - if the engine can go quite on those certified birds with 10s of = thousands of hours and million of dollars of test and development – it can = certainly happen to our projects.

 

But, your question or viewpoint =  just might save some guys bacon – and it might be mine.  So have = no hesitancy about stating your view – just keep it civil and = you’ll never have a problem on this list – now you may or may not get = anybody to agree with you – but that is a different horse = {:>).

 

Ed

 

 

 

From: = Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Rino
Sent: Monday, March 15, = 2010 10:58 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Ut-Oh...

 

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



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus = signature database 3267 (20080714) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

------=_NextPart_000_0000_01CAC433.DB203E20--