Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:22 AM - Re: COAXIAL CABLES recommendations (Floyd)
2. 05:53 AM - Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report ()
3. 06:24 AM - Re: Battery Proximity and mounting (Speedy11@aol.com)
4. 06:34 AM - Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report (Speedy11@aol.com)
5. 07:17 AM - Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report (jaybannist@cs.com)
6. 07:51 AM - Re: Battery Proximity and mounting (MLWynn@aol.com)
7. 08:16 AM - Re: Re: Battery Proximity and mounting (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 08:48 AM - Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 08:50 AM - Re: COAXIAL CABLES recommendations (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 08:57 AM - Re: Battery Proximity and mounting (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 09:09 AM - Re: Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report (Ernest Christley)
12. 10:11 AM - Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report ()
13. 03:21 PM - NTSB RV10 Accident Report (Robert Mitchell)
14. 04:38 PM - Unterminated wires (was: Complex aircraft NTSB report) (Dale Rogers)
15. 04:46 PM - Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 09:07 PM - Re: Unterminated wires (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 10:12 PM - Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report (Ralph Finch)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: COAXIAL CABLES recommendations |
I used RG58A/U for my radios and VOR. Same stuff that is on my 65 Cherokee
that has been working for 40 years.
I used the RG 400 for the GPS antenna.
The reason for the 58 was cost savings. If you check ebay you can find RG
400 for $1.00 per foot. At that price, I would have used it for everything.
Floyd Wilkes
Zodiac 601XL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thruster87" <alania@optusnet.com.au>
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2009 12:51 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: COAXIAL CABLES recommendations
> <alania@optusnet.com.au>
>
> Any recommendations for which coax can be used to wire the radio and the
> transponder ????
> RG 400 - Standard cable for radio installations. Double shielded stranded
> conductor, MIL-DTL-17 spec. Approved for certified aircraft.
> PN 11-09202 $2.75 ($3.55AUD)
>
>
> RG 142 - Low loss coax cable for GPS, TPX, and DME installations. Double
> shielded solid conductor, MIL-C-17 spec. Approved for certified aircraft.
> PN 11-00043 $2.95 ($3.80AUD)
>
>
> RG 58A/U - Standard cable for experimental avionics installations. Single
> shielded stranded conductor, jacket type ?" PVC. For experimental
> aircraft only.
> PN 11-03920 $0.46 ($0.59AUD)
>
>
> RG 58C/U - Standard cable for experimental avionics installations. Single
> shielded stranded conductor, jacket type ?" Non-PVC. For experimental
> aircraft only.
> PN 11-04258 $0.46 ($0.59AUD) Thanks
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=250288#250288
>
>
>
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report |
Well I am just spitballing here but If I had to put forth a theory it would be
that the propellor and power problem are what finally did him in. If he had to
manually adjust the propellor pitch every time he changed power I think he could
have easily either gotten distracted by it and stopped flying the airplane
or messed up the settings and lost thrust even though the engine was running.
Just my 2 cents. I would have found that plane very hard to fly in that condition.
Can't trust the instruments so look outside, reduce power then change prop
pitch, shut off alarm, look outside again, oops to low add power reset prop
pitch, shut off alarm, etc. I think it would have been easy for him to get distracted
or mess up the power or prop setting.
Bottom line is if it ain't working right fix it before you fly.
---- Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com> wrote:
>
> Agreed, very troubling for the RV-10 community that suffered this and 2
> weather related fatals in the same year. I don't see any facts in the
> report relating to the electronic ignition for the Subaru engine, and
> its power source, but it certainly makes one wonder if the crash was
> initiated by loss of electrons to fire plugs and produce power, followed
> by power off attempt at landing that unfortunately was not successful.
> The mention of numerous unterminated wires does lead to head scratching.
> KM
> RV 10 #40866
>
> Bob Collins wrote:
> > As I build my RV, I also tend to want to have the rod end bearing jam
> > nuts torqued down. Oh, and if a threaded rod breaks, I'll probably
> > replace it rather than just stick it in with the broken part absent.
> >
> > The problem with many of us who knew Dan is that he was a good guy. A
> > really nice guy.
> >
> > I certainly would want to look again at the DAR who signed off and I
> > feel bad for the friends mentioned in the report who clearly tried to
> > tell him a few things and I'm guessing they're kicking themselves for
> > not being a little more direct.
> >
> > One tragedy WAS averted here. I believe Dan had planned to put his
> > family in this plane later that day and fly to Boston.
> >
> > Let's be careful as we discuss this not to get too insulting toward Dan
> > while learning from his death. It's a very difficult close-to-home story
> > for those of us in the RV community.
> >
> > *
> >
> >
> > *
>
>
>
>
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Battery Proximity and mounting |
Looks like we have another a**hole that refuses to include his name.
Could he be ashamed of it?
I got a nasty note from him off the forum for my comments on the forum.
Wonder what up with him?
Stan Sutterfield
Do not archive
Bob:
A complete non answer. Lot of words...no relevance.
On page 17-11 (rev11) you state that "RG battery reliability and
performance
supplemented with good preventative maintenance drives probability of
gross
battery failure to zero"
You don't say "near zero", "close to zero", "approaching zero", or any
such
thing. To claim anything has a zero probability of failure is a pretty
bold
statement to make. Further, judging from the general tone of your
writing
style, there's as much a chance of that statement being rhetoric as
anything else.
When I first read your book a couple years ago, I tried to get some
clarification from you on that statement. At first, when I asked
directly,
you simply didn't address the question. I gave up on that approach.
Since
then, whenever other group members have touched on the issue, I have
attempted, by asking questions in different ways, to get you to explain
further the meaning of your statement. In response to the inquiries (mine
and others) on this subject, you either:
1. Don't answer.
2. Provide theoretical fluffery
3. Answer questions that aren't asked
4. Introduce extraneous issues
5. Claim its beyond understanding
At first, I thought I was close to getting some answers this time, but as
before, the answers degraded into one or more of the above categories. I
really don't understand why you can't give a full and complete explanation
of what you mean by "gross battery failure" and "zero probability" in some
meaningful and understandable way. After all, its your statement, you
should be able to substantiate it. But, that's apparently not the case.
I've noticed that you seem to follow that pattern on a few other issues as
well. Anyway, I'm tired of trying to coax an explanation out of you so
I
won't bring up it up again. I'll just assume the statement was the result
of your writing style and not to be taken literally. In any regard, I
don't need the information now, and when I do, I'll get it from other
sources.
Thanks
**************Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the
grill. (http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood00000006)
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report |
I believe Ernest is correct.
The report does indicate a pattern of behavior that may have contributed
to the accident.
Stan Sutterfield
I suggest reading the report again...but cross out all the superfluous
lines that obviously have nothing at all to do with the accident. Cross
out the parts that point out "He didn't follow the rules. He was a
BAAAAD man." It'll be a much shorter report. The pilot of N289DT may
very well be a prime candidate for a Darwin Award, but we can't know
that from reading this report. All I can tell is that the investigator
was much more concerned with pointing out how the pilot was not
following procedure than about what occurred.
**************Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the
grill. (http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood00000006)
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report |
It is absolutely not advisable, but on the ground, one can push one's luck and
"pencil whip" a lot of stuff and probably get away with it.? When you are airborne
and things go wrong, you can't just pull out a pencil and eraser and make
problems go away. Pencil whipping is a close cousin of illogical rationalization.
Both are counterproductive in that they tend to only hurt the person that
does it.? Pencil whipping and illogical rationalization are pure fantasy.? Airborne
problems are reality.? Better to stay in the realm of reality all the time,
on the ground and in the air.?
Off the soapbox - Jay Bannister
Do not archive
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Battery Proximity and mounting |
Hi all,
This has been a very enlightening thread for me. I am persuaded that a
single battery, dual alternator is probably quite sufficient for my mission
envelope and will save me a good #20 over using the second battery.
This is not the forum to argue the battery position in an RV 8. There are
several long discussions on the VAF forum. The up side of the rear
position is the weight and balance advantage, as RV 8's tend to be nose heavy.
The down side is an additional six to eight foot run of #2 welding cable,
its associated weight, resistance and potential for chaffing. I will have to
give that a little more thought.
Thank you all for your insights and off-line diagrams.
Regards,
Michael Wynn
RV 8 FWF
San Ramon, CA
**************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy
Steps!
eExcfooterNO62)
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Battery Proximity and mounting |
At 08:18 AM 6/27/2009, you wrote:
>Looks like we have another a**hole that refuses to include his
>name. Could he be ashamed of it?
>I got a nasty note from him off the forum for my comments on the forum.
>Wonder what up with him?
Gently my friend. This is after all a classroom
with a broad spectrum of attendee needs and
skill sets. The value of what we do here is
not increased by prejudicial words. Let
us strive to be teachers with a goal of
working to everyone's satisfaction.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report |
At 07:51 AM 6/27/2009, you wrote:
Well I am just spitballing here but If I had to put forth a theory it
would be that the propellor and power problem are what finally did
him in. If he had to manually adjust the propellor pitch every time
he changed power I think he could have easily either gotten
distracted by it and stopped flying the airplane or messed up the
settings and lost thrust even though the engine was running. Just my
2 cents. I would have found that plane very hard to fly in that
condition. Can't trust the instruments so look outside, reduce power
then change prop pitch, shut off alarm, look outside again, oops to
low add power reset prop pitch, shut off alarm, etc. I think it would
have been easy for him to get distracted or mess up the power or prop setting.
Bottom line is if it ain't working right fix it before you fly.
There have been numerous electrically driven prop
pitch adjustment mechanisms that were not automatic.
The earliest I recall was on a 50's vintage Bonanza.
These are treated for all practical purposes as a
fixed pitch prop that can be changed in flight. Keep
in mind that the engine will keep the craft airborne
at ANY prop pitch setting. The value in being able to
adjust it is obvious for optimizing climb vs. cruise
performance . . . but departures from optimum settings
do not automatically present hazards beyond that
of distracting a pilot that doesn't understand how
it works.
If we indulge in useful speculation I'll suggest
that items in the factual report are particularly
significant. Namely the probability that wires
that SHOULD have been managing power around the
recently moved batteries were not properly
terminated. Given that the engine was electrically
dependent, the idea that wires were coming loose
at the battery is not pleasant to contemplate.
Once the engine is dead, the pilot is faced with
a whole new task that exceedingly few are well
trained to achieve . . . walk away from the
impending arrival with the earth. Pilot's attitudes
and other errors not withstanding, the manner in
which the last few seconds of this story unfolded
tells the tale.
I'm told that the terrain was relatively flat
farm land and that major damage to the airframe
occurred when it contacted a raised roadbed
at right angles. All these things suggest a
host of poor actions on the part of a neophyte
pilot who was tasked with making good decisions
under the worst of circumstances.
As dark-n-stormy night stories go, this one is
rich with factual data. At the same time, it's
particularly sad because the root cause that
started this unhappy chain of events probably
did not involve an error of design or failure
of a component. It seems likely that attention
to ordinary details of good craftsmanship and
pilotage set the stage for this play. It's
no different than finding the engine suddenly
silent because one neglected to take on
predictable and necessary fuel before flight.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: COAXIAL CABLES recommendations |
At 06:20 AM 6/27/2009, you wrote:
>
>I used RG58A/U for my radios and VOR. Same stuff that is on my 65
>Cherokee that has been working for 40 years.
>
>I used the RG 400 for the GPS antenna.
>
>The reason for the 58 was cost savings. If you check ebay you can
>find RG 400 for $1.00 per foot. At that price, I would have used it
>for everything.
>
>Floyd Wilkes
>Zodiac 601XL
Good thought. RG58 is pvc and polyethylene
for insulation . . . the best we knew how
to do in WWII. RG-400 and cousins are modern,
high temperature materials and double shielded
to boot. The best we know how to do in 2009.
It's a plugs, points and coil versus electronic
ignition kind of decision. Both will function
as advertised.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Battery Proximity and mounting |
At 09:49 AM 6/27/2009, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>This has been a very enlightening thread for me. I am persuaded
>that a single battery, dual alternator is probably quite sufficient
>for my mission envelope and will save me a good #20 over using the
>second battery.
>
>This is not the forum to argue the battery position in an RV
>8. There are several long discussions on the VAF forum. The up
>side of the rear position is the weight and balance advantage, as RV
>8's tend to be nose heavy. The down side is an additional six to
>eight foot run of #2 welding cable, its associated weight,
>resistance and potential for chaffing. I will have to give that a
>little more thought.
>
>Thank you all for your insights and off-line diagrams.
Batteries have been the classical mitigator
of wight and balance issues since day-one.
Of all major weight contributors, the batteries
have always been the easiest to relocate.
I'll suggest that concerns for wire weight
and installation requirements take a very
distant back seat to the airplane's handling
qualities. Batteries have been carried
around in the tail of airplanes in tens of
thousands of airplanes. When I started at
Cessna, I think all of our batteries were in
the tail. Doing a good job of installing
the wire is a trivial task.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report |
jaybannist@cs.com wrote:
> It is absolutely not advisable, but on the ground, one can push one's
> luck and "pencil whip" a lot of stuff and probably get away with it.
> When you are airborne and things go wrong, you can't just pull out a
> pencil and eraser and make problems go away. Pencil whipping is a
> close cousin of illogical rationalization. Both are counterproductive
> in that they tend to only hurt the person that does it. Pencil
> whipping and illogical rationalization are pure fantasy. Airborne
> problems are reality. Better to stay in the realm of reality all the
> time, on the ground and in the air.
>
> Off the soapbox - Jay Bannister
> Do not archive
> Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
In no case, and at no point does the wind, engine, wings or control
surfaces have any idea or concern about what your pencil is doing.
Flying with loose lock nuts on the rod ends or control rods is STEWPID.
Stupid in the "Heh, Bubba, watch this!" vein of stupid. But unless one
is found disconnected, it was simply stupid, not fatal.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report |
---- "Robert L. Nuckolls wrote:
>
>
>> There have been numerous electrically driven prop
> pitch adjustment mechanisms that were not automatic.
> The earliest I recall was on a 50's vintage Bonanza.
> These are treated for all practical purposes as a
> fixed pitch prop that can be changed in flight. Keep
> in mind that the engine will keep the craft airborne
> at ANY prop pitch setting. The value in being able to
> adjust it is obvious for optimizing climb vs. cruise
> performance . . . but departures from optimum settings
> do not automatically present hazards beyond that
> of distracting a pilot that doesn't understand how
> it works.
>
> If we indulge in useful speculation I'll suggest
> that items in the factual report are particularly
> significant. Namely the probability that wires
> that SHOULD have been managing power around the
> recently moved batteries were not properly
> terminated. Given that the engine was electrically
> dependent, the idea that wires were coming loose
> at the battery is not pleasant to contemplate.
>
Another good possibility Bob. If as the story says, he crimped the battery terminals
with a pair of pliers the connections could very well have come loose. My
point was that he had a constant speed prop apparently and was trying to adjust
it with each change in power setting which, along with everything else, could
have overloaded him especially if he was having intermitent electrical problems
from a loose battery wire.
I have to agree with poor craftsmanship and a seeming passion for working around
problems instead of fixing them seems the culprit. A strong lesson we should
all take to heart. Another lesson here is that if you have a friend, acquaintance
or fellow pilot with a problem help them to get it fixed and don't let them
think it is okay to fly with these kinds of issues. The days of duct tape
and bailing wire fixes are long gone.
Rodney
Message 13
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | NTSB RV10 Accident Report |
This is forwarded from the Lancair mailing list without comment, except that
there are a couple hundred lessons in here.
Bob Mitchell
L-320
For a number of reasons I track some of the RV websites and data. You may
want to read the accident report from Dan Lloyd's accident last November,
because it has so many lessons for all of us. He had an RV10 with an early
turbocharged Eggenfellner Subaru H-6 engine. This really was a bad case of
"Get -to-Oshkosh-itis", and some of the mistakes made are pretty scary. I
am listing it because I suspect that we could all learn from it. By all
accounts, Dan was regarded as a a pretty sound person, which makes it even
more applicable to our community. You can read the report at
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 071120X01821
<http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 071120X01821&ntsbno=NYC08FA023&
akey=1> &ntsbno=NYC08FA023&akey=1
Message 14
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Unterminated wires (was: Complex aircraft NTSB report) |
Whether unterminated wires were problematic would be
dependent on the circumstances. On a new plane, I wouldn't be
surprised to find wires with unstripped ends, tied off to the side
awaiting some as-yet un-purchased option.
Now if the loose ends (literally) were stripped and showed
signs of having been previously connected to something - that
could be worrisome.
My $0.25
($.02 adjusted for 40 years of government theft through "inflation")
Dale R.
COZY MkIV #0497
Ch. 13
Mesa, AZ
Kelly McMullen wrote:
> <kellym@aviating.com>
>
> Agreed, very troubling for the RV-10 community that suffered this and
> 2 weather related fatals in the same year. I don't see any facts in
> the report relating to the electronic ignition for the Subaru engine,
> and its power source, but it certainly makes one wonder if the crash
> was initiated by loss of electrons to fire plugs and produce power,
> followed by power off attempt at landing that unfortunately was not
> successful. The mention of numerous unterminated wires does lead to
> head scratching.
> KM
> RV 10 #40866
Message 15
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Complex aircraft NTSB report |
>I have to agree with poor craftsmanship and a seeming passion for
>working around problems instead of fixing them seems the culprit. A
>strong lesson we should all take to heart. Another lesson here is
>that if you have a friend, acquaintance or fellow pilot with a
>problem help them to get it fixed and don't let them think it is
>okay to fly with these kinds of issues. The days of duct tape and
>bailing wire fixes are long gone.
>
>Rodney
Well put sir. I'll suggest that the mission is core
to the purposes of all the Lists. They can be the
repository and offeror of proven recipes for success
as well as a filter for combining simple-ideas
into new recipes.
This isn't just a brother's keeper issue. When
somebody makes a spectacular and newsworthy exit in
any (but particularly an OBAM) aircraft, public and
regulatory perceptions will paint us all with the same
brush dipped into the words of ignorant and ratings-
motivated vendors of the morning rags and disseminators
of the evening news.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
Message 16
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Unterminated wires |
At 05:36 PM 6/27/2009, you wrote:
Whether unterminated wires were problematic would be
dependent on the circumstances. On a new plane, I wouldn't be
surprised to find wires with unstripped ends, tied off to the side
awaiting some as-yet un-purchased option.
Now if the loose ends (literally) were stripped and showed
signs of having been previously connected to something - that
could be worrisome.
The report speaks specifically to several
wires not mated to terminals on the contactor.
That the battery and contactor had been recently
moved but without benefit of crimp tools. "Channel
Locks" were used to install terminals.
A hardware store torch and solder could have
provided secure if temporary connections.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
---------------------------------------
Message 17
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Complex aircraft NTSB report |
I finally read the NTSB report. As usual, these accidents are years in the
making. Not sure what lesson(s) apply to us here..idiots with more money
than brains are everywhere, including the highest levels of Wall Street and
banking ;).
This quote by the owner/pilot is classic: ". just doing due diligence." We
sure are good at self-deception.
Ralph
RV-9A QB SA
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam
Hoskins
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 4:51 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Complex aircraft NTSB report
All,
I found this link on the rotary engine news group. It's a thorough NTSB
report about a complex engine/electrical installation that the builder/pilot
was unwilling and unprepared to finish correctly.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 071120X01821
<http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 071120X01821&ntsbno=NYC08FA023&
akey=1> &ntsbno=NYC08FA023&akey=1
Sam
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|