X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from outbound-mail.dca.untd.com ([64.136.47.15] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.4) with SMTP id 4168450 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:35:13 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.136.47.15; envelope-from=alwick@juno.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juno.com; s=alpha; t=1268793276; bh=47DEQpj8HBSa+/TImW+5JCeuQeRkm5NMpJWZG3hSuFU=; l=0; h=Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:Content-Type; b=slnMULU5Q+Lo4p7LJ0WmTjpSm1N+TswEJ8uCCyrOa+3XhCkRE3QtoXB5UI4yrWkL8 qz2UADxtG7OwHJVrpqHYuSbyLt0q6XDaVCHSGRJwXb8tfGfwIKxMm968dlQg71usn3 o592mtSprmS9Llv4Jm/kyUiKb54opEWAaEV3cvhA= Received: from Penny (c-98-246-117-71.hsd1.or.comcast.net [98.246.117.71]) by smtpout05.dca.untd.com with SMTP id AABF4AR7SAQTM792 for (sender ); Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:34:24 -0700 (PST) Message-ID: From: "Al Wick" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Ut-Oh... Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:34:23 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_013C_01CAC53F.AEBBB870" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18005 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18005 X-UNTD-BodySize: 19476 X-ContentStamp: 48:24:4183632779 X-MAIL-INFO:4008d578197900fc297d002dd848889cb569c55dc568096c1d8c0d79d8a94d5de9b819e52988f89c216d6ccc1d3829004ce54ce1192c0108e18da5a5d82939e19de96cbdf95828b931bc2cbca955059911cd3d9d95d1d1a8f518280dd95c884db8f9add1486961d9c9a5b5c5f169218815e8 X-UNTD-OriginStamp: L941HVjjYzDhN3itp//mkIh9qAoYumQs2L7BqaD/xmJZKEhqhFv4AQ== X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 10.171.42.35|smtpout05.dca.untd.com|smtpout05.dca.untd.com|alwick@juno.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_013C_01CAC53F.AEBBB870 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks for the explanation Tracy. Appreciate your challenge of limited = time. I've noticed unintended mixture change is fairly common. About one = a year, maybe more (including non- rws ECU's). I've confident there are = at least 20 different ways to address this problem. Without reducing = controls users currently have.=20 I had hoped for ecu change, as it's so sweeping. Firmware update and = suddenly the whole fleet flies safer. Oh well, gave it a try.=20 regards -al wick ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tracy Crook=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 9:46 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ut-Oh... You make a lot of valid points Al. Don't always agree on the = conclusion but the points are good. For example, your idea for the = "are you sure?" step for mixture adjustment would hamper the immediate = action of adjusting the mixture as one of the first steps I recommend = when ever any engine running problem occurs. There is a LONG list of = reasons for doing this and it has saved my bacon on many occasions, = especially during early development. No argument, there ARE a lot of 'small' (ha!) changes I could make to = improve things. Cost, complexity and time are major factors why I = don't. That last one is a biggie. I spend well over 40 hours a week = just trying to keep up with current demands in a business that I had no = intention of getting into and would gladly turn over to someone else if = that were possible. (I tried that once on a limited basis and it was a = disaster) =20 Fundamental changes that affect basic function and safety are a = different matter. When they come up everything else gets dropped and = the problem is addressed as quickly and completely as I know how to do. So yes, what I am offering is only the best I can do with the time and = resources I have available. It is far from the best that can be done. = And yes, I know there is the chance that I could be hearing that line = from some grieving widow's lawyer someday. Another great aspect of this = thing. Some risks you just have to live with. Tracy Crook, RWS On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Al Wick wrote: Another dead stick landing. Same old causes. Fortunately no = fatalities....this time.=20 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.=20 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.=20 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.=20 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.=20 -al wick ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tracy Crook=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 7:10 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ut-Oh... I know Dave or Jon wouldn't phrase it this way but I've already = received a number of messages from others about these two recent = in-flight power failures due to EC2 issues.=20 Jon's was due to a loose mounting nut inside the EC2 that shorted = the main power input filter to ground and burned open both foils from = the 2 power input pins. How lucky was that.=20 Anyway, at the risk of sounding defensive, I thought I'd share = my response to one of them that suggested changing the EC2 case to an = external mount of some sort. I'm sure there are scores of messages on = the way urging me to place switch guards on the cold start switch : ) REPLY Hello ---------- I'm aware of the failure and have the unit here for repair. Like a thousand other critical details in building an aircraft, = it is not possible to explicitly spell out all of them. The precise = method and hardware used to accomplish it are not part of the EC2 or the = instructions. The first paragraph of the installation guide does say the = following: "Needless to say, the quality of installation is just as important = as the quality of the hardware itself. It is not practical to include a = course on proper electrical wiring practices in these installation = instructions, but it is imperative that proper wiring techniques be = employed during the installation of the EC2."=20 It was my thought that avoiding the presence of loose metal = objects inside an electrical device that your life depends on fell into = the category of "needless to say". Nevertheless, a cautionary note might well be worth adding. As = also stated in the first paragraph of the instructions,=20 " I want your project to succeed and your life to be a long and = happy one. " ------=_NextPart_000_013C_01CAC53F.AEBBB870 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks for the explanation Tracy. = Appreciate your=20 challenge of limited time. I've=20 noticed unintended mixture change is fairly common. About one a = year, maybe=20 more (including non- rws ECU's).  I've confident there are at least = 20=20 different ways to address this problem. Without reducing controls = users=20 currently have. 
 
I had hoped for ecu change, as it's so = sweeping.=20 Firmware update and suddenly the whole fleet flies safer. Oh well, gave = it a=20 try.
 
regards
 
-al wick
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tracy=20 Crook
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 = 9:46=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Ut-Oh...

You make a lot of valid points Al.  Don't always = agree on=20 the conclusion but the points are good.   For example, your = idea for=20 the "are you sure?" step for mixture adjustment would hamper the = immediate=20 action of adjusting the mixture as one of the first steps I recommend = when=20 ever any engine running problem occurs.  There is a LONG list of = reasons=20 for doing this and it has saved my bacon on many occasions, especially = during=20 early development.

No argument, there ARE a lot of 'small' = (ha!)=20 changes I could make to improve things.   Cost, complexity = and time=20 are major factors why I don't.  That last one is a biggie.  = I spend=20 well over 40 hours a week just trying to keep up with current demands = in a=20 business that I had no intention of getting into and would gladly turn = over to=20 someone else if that were possible.  (I tried that once on a = limited=20 basis and it was a disaster) 

Fundamental changes that = affect=20 basic function and safety are a different matter.  When they come = up=20 everything else gets dropped and the problem is addressed as quickly = and=20 completely as I know how to do.

So yes, what I am offering is = only the=20 best I can do with the time and resources I have available.  It = is far=20 from the best that can be done.  And yes, I know there is the = chance that=20 I could be hearing that line from some grieving widow's lawyer = someday. =20 Another great aspect of this thing.  Some risks you just have to = live=20 with.

Tracy Crook,   RWS

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Al Wick = <alwick@juno.com>=20 wrote:
Another dead stick = landing. Same old=20 causes. Fortunately no fatalities....this time.
 
Let's pretend you are the copilot. = You've been=20 flying along for 10 minutes. When the pilot says: "Hey Bob, how = about giving=20 me 150 times as much fuel right now."   You'd say:"WHAT?!! = You are=20 crazy, that will shut down the engine!"
Pilot:" Oops, my bad. O2 and egt's = are normal.=20 My mistake"
 
Does that sound far fetched? Nope. = It happens a=20 couple times a year. Often it's a case where the pilot inadvertently = drives=20 the ecu to super lean condition. Engines suddenly quits. Let's = use your=20 home pc as an example. You tell the pc to delete all files on your = hard=20 drive. It recognizes this is most unusual and could be catastrophic. = So it=20 says:"Are you sure you want to wipe out hard drive? This could be=20 fatal"
 
Every failure has more than one = cause. Yes, the=20 pilot inadvertently flipped the "cold start" switch when he was = reaching for=20 his gps. Was it Ed last year who inadvertently rotated the mixture = to full=20 lean?  Last year Keith's passenger bumped the ecu mixture = knob=20 while getting in the plane. So, yes, Ed, Keith, and Dave all = made the=20 same mistakes. They placed a switch capable of shutting down the = engine in=20 the wrong area of the instrument panel. End of story? = NO!
 
As soon as one of these ECU = suppliers adds the=20 "Are you sure?" logic, then all of these failures disappear. Pretty = simple=20 logic statement. Actually, there are a whole bunch of ways this can = be=20 handled. I had to do this type of programming with industrial plc's = because=20 these same "oops" were so common. Think about this. If engine has = been=20 running for more than 5 minutes, only allow small mixture changes. = Never=20 enough to shut down engine. So let's say that 100 will shut down = engine,=20 then we only allow a change of 20 each minute.
 
I think the ECU providers recognize = builder=20 error. "Whew! Not MY problem."  They don't ask: "Is there = something I=20 can do to save lives?"   If they make these simple = changes, then=20 every single plane is no longer sensitive to these common "oops" = scenarios.=20 So yes, if Dave moves his switch, HE will be safer. But if the = ECU=20 supplier makes this simple programming change, then every single = plane will=20 be safer. Real world mistakes will no longer shut down the engine.=20
 
I want these suppliers to be = successful. I want=20 fewer plane crashes. But it's not going to happen unless you guys=20 (privately) encourage these simple changes.
 
This group is making good progress = on failure=20 reduction. There are a handful of ecu changes that will really make = a=20 difference. Please pursue! Question question question.
 
 
-al wick
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Tracy Crook
To: Rotary = motors in=20 aircraft
Sent: Sunday, March 14, = 2010 7:10=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re:=20 Ut-Oh...

I know Dave or Jon wouldn't phrase it this way but = I've=20 already received a number of messages from others about these two = recent=20 in-flight power failures due to EC2 issues.

 Jon's = was due to=20 a loose mounting nut inside the EC2 that shorted the main power = input=20 filter to ground and burned open both foils from the 2 power input = pins.  How lucky was that.

  Anyway, at the risk = of=20 sounding defensive, I thought I'd share my response to one of them = that=20 suggested changing the EC2 case to an external mount of some = sort. =20 I'm sure there are scores of messages on the way urging me to = place switch=20 guards on the cold start switch  : = )

REPLY

Hello=20 ----------
  I'm aware of the failure and have the unit = here for=20 repair.

   Like a thousand other critical details = in=20 building an aircraft, it is not possible to explicitly spell out = all of=20 them.  The precise method and hardware used to accomplish it = are not=20 part of the EC2 or the instructions. The first paragraph of the=20 installation guide does say the following:
"Needless to=20 say, the quality of installation is just as important as the = quality of=20 the hardware itself.  It is not practical to = include a=20 course on proper electrical wiring practices in these installation = instructions, but it is imperative that proper wiring techniques = be=20 employed during the installation of the EC2."

It was my = thought=20 that avoiding the presence of loose metal objects inside an = electrical=20 device that your life depends on fell into the category of  = "needless=20 to say".

Nevertheless, a cautionary note might well be = worth=20 adding.   As also stated in the first paragraph of the=20 instructions,
" I want = your project=20 to succeed and your life to be a long and happy one. "
 

------=_NextPart_000_013C_01CAC53F.AEBBB870--