Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:49 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Matt Prather)
2. 05:17 AM - Re: Pitot Heat (tomcostanza)
3. 05:56 AM - Re: GPS Jamming (Noel Loveys)
4. 06:16 AM - Re: Re: Battery box being demanded (Noel Loveys)
5. 06:28 AM - Re: Re: Battery box being demanded (Noel Loveys)
6. 06:38 AM - Re: Re: Battery box being demanded (Noel Loveys)
7. 06:38 AM - Re: Re: Battery box being demanded (Noel Loveys)
8. 06:45 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (George, Neal E Capt USAF ACC 505 TRS/DOJ)
9. 06:53 AM - Re: Re: Battery box being demanded (Noel Loveys)
10. 07:04 AM - Re: GPS Jamming (Roger)
11. 07:19 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 07:22 AM - Re: Re: Unvented AGM? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 07:51 AM - Re: Re: Battery box being demanded (Dj Merrill)
14. 07:56 AM - Re: Pitot Heat (tomcostanza)
15. 08:05 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Dj Merrill)
16. 08:44 AM - Re: GPS Jamming (David)
17. 09:27 AM - Re: GPS Jamming (ROGER & JEAN CURTIS)
18. 09:42 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
19. 09:50 AM - Re: Re: Pitot Heat (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 10:01 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat- but off topic (rayj)
21. 10:14 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Carlos Trigo)
22. 10:42 AM - Re: Battery box being demanded (RayStL)
23. 11:29 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
24. 11:56 AM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Dj Merrill)
25. 12:03 PM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Lynn Riggs)
26. 12:40 PM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Bob Sultzbach)
27. 12:40 PM - Re: Re: Battery box being demanded (Vern Little)
28. 12:55 PM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (George, Neal E Capt USAF ACC 505 TRS/DOJ)
29. 12:58 PM - Re: GPS Jamming (Robert Mitchell)
30. 01:38 PM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Dj Merrill)
31. 03:53 PM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Bob Lee)
32. 04:31 PM - Re: Battery box being demanded (RayStL)
33. 04:33 PM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (Ralph Finch)
34. 05:03 PM - Re: Re: Pitot heat (earl_schroeder@juno.com)
35. 06:30 PM - Re: Re: Pitot heat- but off topic (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
36. 07:15 PM - Pitot heat (Tom Koelzer)
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 |
|
Hey Mr. Nuckolls..
So, my question is, what do you do after the icing encounter? Say you've be
en lucky (or prudent), and extricated yourself and the contents of the airpl
ane from the icing conditions.. Now do you just have to go somewhere else a
nd land and wait for the bird to dry/thaw? What if there's an alternate rou
te available that avoids the icy conditions, but is less desirable for other
reasons (around the mountain range vs over the pass)? Maybe you want to ga
uge how much cruise speed the airplane has lost because of the ice. Certainl
y GPS groundspeed can give you an idea about the remaining performance, but b
eing able to cross check with IAS is nice. While I agree that a heated pit
ot might give some people false confidence, it seems to me there's some util
ity in one.
Matt-
On Feb 9, 2011, at 6:10 PM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelec
tric.com> wrote:
> At 06:47 PM 2/9/2011, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm sure a 25000+ hour pilot can fly an airplane with only a compass and
>> > an oil pressure gauge. But as a 200 hour wimpy VFR pilot, I'll feel
>> > safer.
>>
>> I personally take offence at the off-handed remark. <snip>
>
> Gently my friend, he was only voicing his
> personal trepidation no doubt borne out
> of a sense of his own ignorance and low
> position on the totumpole of experience.
>
> We were all there once. It's a fair bet
> that a 25K hour pilot has at least learned
> a few things that added to his/her longevity
> and made them eligible for admission to the
> priesthood.
>
>> . There have been very few regulations made without blood being shed.
>
> Indeed, that has ALWAYS been the overtly
> admitted goal for those-who-know-more-about-
> airplanes-than-we-do. And indeed, many
> regulations have obvious, demonstrable benefits
> . . . but not all . . . especially when
> misunderstood and misapplied. Witness the recent
> discussion on the need for adding battery boxes
> to SVLA batteries.
>
> I will suggest that there's an ever-increasing
> flood of regulations that have no relationship
> to anyone's loss of blood and a lot to do with
> empire building.
>
> I hypothesized a C-172 taking on ice . . .
> the pitot system IS heated and offers a degree of
> confidence. My invitation to the List was to
> consider how, and under what conditions the IAS
> indicator was useful for reducing risk. E.g.
> in a deteriorating situation, at what IAS number
> do you "get really concerned" and once that point
> is reached, what's the next step?
>
> I have further hypothesized that having a believable
> IAS reading under this scenario is of little or
> no value for reducing risks. By the time the airplane
> is sufficiently crippled as to produce an IAS
> value of concern, I've suggested that there is no
> action to take where precise IAS is useful feedback
> for good pilotage.
>
> Rather than taking whacks at our newby friend
> for voicing valid feelings, how can we team
> up with must be hundreds of thousands of hours
> of total experience on this List to reinforce,
> refute, or refine the basis for his feelings?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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 |
|
> I'm sure a 25000+ hour pilot can fly an airplane with only a compass and
> > an oil pressure gauge. But as a 200 hour wimpy VFR pilot, I'll feel
> > safer.
> I personally take offence at the off-handed remark. I once was a new
> pilot, have trained hundreds a CFI since '62 and I made no comments other than
>
> to agree with Bob, whom all respect or they wouldn't be on the list.
> Perhaps after you have made as many mistakes as I did early in my career you
> will realize there are very few old, bold pilots and enjoy your flying as
> much as I have the last 49 years. There have been very few regulations made
> without blood being shed.
> Elbie Mendenhall
I apologize for my compliment. I would have sent a private email, but since the
offense was made before the group, I thought the apology should be too.
With respect,
-Tom
--------
Clear Skies,
Tom Costanza
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330412#330412
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 |
|
As you say it=99s their sand box but they still have to play by
the rules they laid down.
Noel
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Boyd
Sent: February 8, 2011 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: GPS Jamming
I think it's only illegal if the FCC says it is. They can authorize
whatever they want. The restrictions in Top Band to protect Loran-A
were placed by the FCC, and were always subject to their whim. If the
FCC allows 4G jammers into service, a lawsuit would have little standing
that I can see. It's their sand box. We citizens play in it at their
pleasure, or so they think. Which raises a question: should not 11
meters have been called "Subjects' Band?"
Bill B
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Noel Loveys <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
wrote:
They will be shut down with the first lawsuit. It is illegal for anyone
with or without a license to interrupt a radio signal. I expect there
is further legislation preventing the jamming of navigational radio
aids. There was very strict regulations regarding the operation of
radio in the 160 Meter band because of the possibility of interfering
with LORAN C.
Noel
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Bradburry
Sent: February 8, 2011 10:46 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS Jamming
Someone please tell me this is not true!
Bill B
FCC Approves GPS-jamming transmitters
Federal Communications Commission gives the green light to 40,000
broadband transmitters that would cripple GPS navigation.
26 January 2011 =C3=A2=82=AC=9D The Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) has approved a company called LightSquared
Communications to install up to 40,000 high-powered, land-based
broadband transmitters that broadcast in the band directly adjacent to
the GPS frequencies. It has been found that these transmitters would
have a disastrous effect upon aviation GPS receivers such as the popular
Garmin GNS 430W. In testing, the receivers began to be jammed at 13.8
miles from each transmitter site, and navigation was effectively shut
down at 5.6 miles from each site. Automotive units such as the Nuvi did
a little better.
The approval was moved rapidly through the approval process, and the
approval was made despite industry representatives' pleas to evaluate
the transmitters further.
[ Read the Full Article
<http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/news/data-shows-disastrous-gps-jammi
ng-fcc-approved-broadcaster-11029?utm_source=GPS&utm_medium=email&utm
_campaign=Navigate_01_31_2011&utm_content=data-shows-disastrous-gps-j
amming-fcc-approved-broadcaster-11029> >> ]
More information, including contact numbers for the lawmakers who are
involved in the approval process can be found here: GPS Community Urged
to Contact Congress
<http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/news/gps-community-urged-contact-con
gress-regarding-fcc-proposal-10962> .
The FCC's Chief of the International Bureau, Mindel De La Torre, was not
swayed by the protests of the GPS manufacturers; perhaps she would be
influenced by a whole bunch of respectful, concerned citizens who wrote
to her at
<http://us.mc1117.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Mindel.DeLaTorre@fcc.gov
> Mindel.DeLaTorre@fcc.gov, or called her office at 202-418-0437.
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
ist"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: Battery box being demanded |
Sorry Guys but because of the original reverence ot CAR I thought the plane was
Canadian... That accounts for the difference in what is in the reg.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys
Sent: February 9, 2011 10:12 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery box being demanded
I wonder why he stated to you the Section V standard... It doesn't jibe. I would
ask him again to give the exact standard he wants followed.
With that you can google Canadian Aviation Regulations and download the whole mess
in PDF. The first number in the part he wants you to follow is usually written
as a capitol roman numeral. The second number is either a 0 or a 2. If
it is a 0 then it is a regulation. If it is a 2 it is a standard or method to
fulfil the regulation. The third number is the subsection and then the decimal
point. After the decimal point is the specific rules in the subsection.
You can also read the cars in more of an organised mode at:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/regserv/cars/menu.htm
I agree with your assessment of the manifold pressure gauge but if they were really
sticky on it you could have one installed easily. It the most it would have
meant is drilling and welding a boss onto the intake manifold close to the
throttle body... there is probably one there already.
I think what he wants to see is a box capable of withstanding a +3G forward impact
with the weight of the battery in it and also be able to contain the contents
of the battery in the case of an accident. A normal covered plastic battery
box... to fit and be properly secured should satisfy him. Crappy tire (a Canadian
thing)could probably help.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RayStL
Sent: February 8, 2011 1:14 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery box being demanded
Thanks for your help so far.
Let me give more background. The aircraft has been flying for over 3 years. The
MDRA inspector was fine with the battery.
My aircraft has been grounded since the inspection last August. There were 2 issues
they had. The battery is one. The second was because I have a variable pitch
prop (Ivo) regulations say I need a manifold pressure gauge. My engine is
a modern car engine that continuously measures manifold pressure, throttle position,
rpm, air temperature, exhaust oxygen and uses that to control fuel and
ignition. A separate manifold gauge would be a distraction at best.
Yes it would have been easier to knuckle under to their inappropriate requests.
(I would like to Nuckolls them. Grrr.)
They finally relented on the manifold pressure issue. Only the battery issue remains.
The easiest way is to find something approved that will fit in their pigeon hole.
Otherwise I have been told I have go through a full technical analysis (and
test?) to justify it.
On a homebuilt!!!???
--------
Ray St-Laurent
701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330169#330169
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: Battery box being demanded |
Ray try contacting Gary Wolfe president of the RAA. He may be able to help
you as all the Canadian inspectors actually are RAA.
There is also a yahoo group canultra.com which you may be able to contact
him.
Noel
I'm now assuming the plane is here in Canada.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of rayj
Sent: February 9, 2011 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery box being demanded
I am not familiar with how the Canadian system works, but I assume a
bureaucrat is a bureaucrat. Perhaps the MDRA inspector that approved
the initial inspection would be offended by the DOT inspectors
implication that his work was in someway lacking. Perhaps he might be
motivated to go to bat for you and for HIS reputation. The most likely
way this will be resolved in your favor is if you can get someone else
in the government to bring pressure on the DOT guy to change his opinion.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN
On 02/09/2011 11:15 AM, RayStL wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "RayStL"<raystl@nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> Thanks to all have responded. From communications with the DOT inspector,
it is clear that the quickest solution will be to reference a STC for a cub
or similar that uses an underseat strap down of an AGM battery. I know
Concorde has STCs but I have not tracked down yet if that includes
elimination of the battery box.
>
> There is a broader, much more disturbing side to this issue. A DOT
inspector wants to revoke approval for something that has already passed
inspection. The installation has not changed. That means any (Canadian)
homebuilt could theoretically revoke approval for any previously approved
installation. It also unjustly (I believe) questions the validity of any
previous inspection through MDRA.
>
> I know of other Canadian homebuilts using AGMs without battery boxes but I
am not about to cite those as examples.
>
> --ray
>
> --------
> Ray St-Laurent
> 701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330294#330294
>
>
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 box being demanded |
Just for the Americans reading this it is actually TC (Transport Canada)
which does the licensing. An AME is not an Aviation Medical Examiner but an
Aircraft Maintenance Engineer. The inspections of homebuilt aircraft have
been removed form TC in an attempt to free up their inspectors time for
larger aircraft. The Inspectors are actually appointed members of the
Canadian RAA ( Recreational Aircraft Association)
Noel
I've gone back to my original idea that the plane is Canadian so there is a
fool up in the part the inspector quoted.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RayStL
Sent: February 9, 2011 3:43 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery box being demanded
To answer Raymond's question:
An MDRA inspector is not a civil servant. He is a volunteer. In my case he
is also an AME whose livelihood depends on keeping this same DOT inspector
happy.
I have no doubt that this will eventually be resolved in my favor. If I can
find an STC for a similar configuration, it will be done in 2 days.
Otherwise I will have to make a full blown presentation before a tribunal
that in a process I expect will take at least another 2 months.
--------
Ray St-Laurent
701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330315#330315
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 box being demanded |
That would be difficult as home built aircraft are not certified there fore
STCs do not apply. However you can have a look through AC43... The FAA
circular which is the also the Canadian bible on aircraft standards...
Hmmm I wonder if the part he quoted is not in CARs but
AC43. I'll check it out.
for ideas on how to install the battery.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of rayj
Sent: February 9, 2011 4:47 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery box being demanded
do not archive
I hope you are able to resolve it with an STC.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN
On 02/09/2011 01:12 PM, RayStL wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "RayStL"<raystl@nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> To answer Raymond's question:
> An MDRA inspector is not a civil servant. He is a volunteer. In my case he
is also an AME whose livelihood depends on keeping this same DOT inspector
happy.
>
> I have no doubt that this will eventually be resolved in my favor. If I
can find an STC for a similar configuration, it will be done in 2 days.
Otherwise I will have to make a full blown presentation before a tribunal
that in a process I expect will take at least another 2 months.
>
> --------
> Ray St-Laurent
> 701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330315#330315
>
>
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 |
|
I think y'all are still missing the point.
With the airplane picking up ice, the stall speed changes with the accretion.
The type of ice, shape, amount and location all affect the performance of the
aircraft. You won't find performance parameters for your iced-up airframe in
the POH.
A few things you don't know - CAN'T know - with ice on the airframe:
1) How much ice is on the airplane? Quantify it.
2) What does the ice weigh? Again, hard numbers.
3) How fast is the ice accumulating?
4) When will the weight of ice push the airplane over gross weight?
5) When will the airplane stop flying because of the ice it has accumulated?
6) With x amount of ice on the airframe, what's the stall speed?
Let's imagine Capt Super Stud bores thru a low cloud with OAT in the teens and
finds some ice. Doesn't really matter what kind of ice - it's sticking to the
airframe and accumulating. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and a little
luck and say there's a runway close and straight ahead and he's smart enough
to choose to land. It's VFR at pattern altitude, so he joins the downwind
for a standard pattern - got it made, no sweat. 80-kts on downwind, 70-kts on
base, and he falls out of the base-to final turn because the ice has changed
his stall speed.
The point is, an accurate indicated airspeed is of little use where it matters
- near the stall end of the envelope - if you don't know what the stall speed
is in the airplane's current iced-up condition.
neal
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Prather
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Pitot heat
Hey Mr. Nuckolls..
So, my question is, what do you do after the icing encounter? Say you've been
lucky (or prudent), and extricated yourself and the contents of the airplane from
the icing conditions.. Now do you just have to go somewhere else and land
and wait for the bird to dry/thaw? What if there's an alternate route available
that avoids the icy conditions, but is less desirable for other reasons (around
the mountain range vs over the pass)? Maybe you want to gauge how much
cruise speed the airplane has lost because of the ice. Certainly GPS groundspeed
can give you an idea about the remaining performance, but being able to cross
check with IAS is nice. While I agree that a heated pitot might give some
people false confidence, it seems to me there's some utility in one.
Matt-
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: Battery box being demanded |
Just checked AC43.13-2a PP79 - 80 it gives all the requirements for the
battery box or tie down. It is possible the inspector will be happy with
venting that would allow any hydrogen gas he thinks may be produced to
safely be removed. Humour him.
BTW AC43.13 1b/2a is available online from the FAA in pdf format free. If
you make changes for the inspector I'd print the pages from the AC so you
can tell him these are the exact standards you used.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of rayj
Sent: February 9, 2011 4:47 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery box being demanded
do not archive
I hope you are able to resolve it with an STC.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN
On 02/09/2011 01:12 PM, RayStL wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "RayStL"<raystl@nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> To answer Raymond's question:
> An MDRA inspector is not a civil servant. He is a volunteer. In my case he
is also an AME whose livelihood depends on keeping this same DOT inspector
happy.
>
> I have no doubt that this will eventually be resolved in my favor. If I
can find an STC for a similar configuration, it will be done in 2 days.
Otherwise I will have to make a full blown presentation before a tribunal
that in a process I expect will take at least another 2 months.
>
> --------
> Ray St-Laurent
> 701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330315#330315
>
>
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 |
|
As you say it=99s their sand box but they still have to play by
the rules they laid down.
Noel
NO, you forget that this is the government. Only you have to play
by their rules, not them!
Roger
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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 |
|
At 07:42 AM 2/10/2011, you wrote:
Hey Mr. Nuckolls..
So, my question is, what do you do after the icing encounter? Say
you've been lucky (or prudent), and extricated yourself and the
contents of the airplane from the icing conditions.. Now do you just
have to go somewhere else and land and wait for the bird to
dry/thaw? What if there's an alternate route available that avoids
the icy conditions, but is less desirable for other reasons (around
the mountain range vs over the pass)? Maybe you want to gauge how
much cruise speed the airplane has lost because of the ice. Certainly
GPS groundspeed can give you an idea about the remaining performance,
but being able to cross check with IAS is nice. While I agree that
a heated pitot might give some people false confidence, it seems to
me there's some utility in one.
Yes, there's 'utility' or as Bob suggested,
'handiness'. My premise was that IAS is not high
on the list of data items that drive risk reducing
behavior . . . i.e. increase in safety under
icing conditions.
GPS is the system used to calibrate IAS and
ground speed is going to be much more useful
for determining ETA to an alternate airport
than IAS . . . working well or not.
Once you've arrived at a comfortable alternate,
and your airplane is still carrying ice, my
personal experience suggests that IAS, working
or not, is still a shakey foundation for
executing a graceful arrival. My approach would
arrive over the numbers flat and fast . . . fly
it on and concentrate on holding directional
control as opposed to the customary quest for a
'greaser'.
Once the airplane is iced up, the rules by
which we normally conduct comfortable flight
are changed. Further, the new rules are relatively
unknown to the pilot who seldom, if ever,
encounters the situation. Lessons learned from
my one and only encounter were profound.
No doubt there are individuals in our numbers
who have encountered icing conditions numerous
times and have acquired comfort levels consistent
with their experience in their choice of airplanes.
My question to the List goes to the notion of
advising our 200 hour VFR friend that having a
heated pitot offers any quantum improvements in
risk-reduction. The simple-ideas under which ice,
airplanes, instrumentation and pilots interact do not
seem to support the advice. In my own experience,
I was using good IAS data right down to the point
where the airplane suddenly refused to fly. But
I'd be pleased to be corrected if that deduction
can be shown to be in error.
Bob . . .
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: Unvented AGM? |
At 02:44 PM 2/9/2011, you wrote:
Hi Bob
You might find this amusing. It is an excerpt of a message from the
DOT inspector where he cherry picks words from the Power Sonic
manual. The underlines are his.
Given the right set of circumstances, such as extreme overcharging or
shorting of the battery, these gases might vent into the enclosure
and create the potential for an explosion when ignited by a spark.
Generally, ventilation inherent in most enclosures is sufficient to
avoid problems.
. . . the corollary to the last statement is that
you can't get any better ventilation than to have
no enclosure whatsoever.
Some months ago we were considering this particular
example of a 'battery failure'.
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Batteries/Odyssey_OV/Odyssey_OV_1.jpg
Some folks jumped on the swollen case and decided
that what ever value the over-pressure protection
was set for, this photo proved that it was "too low."
The investigator did tests on the un-damaged over-pressure
safety valves and found them well in specification.
The observed swelling was a function of heating plus
swelling of the battery's innards long after the
moisture had departed the battery though the valves.
This failure mode indicates a PROTRACTED exposure to
an overvoltage condition by a power source capable of
considerable energy (60+ amp alternator?). But this
poor puppy was never at risk for root cause of any
sort of 'explosion'.
Potential hazards are present, as described by the battery
Manufacturer, Power-Sonic. These hazards reflects a requirement to
enclose the battery in a vented battery box to ensure aviation safety
for other than "During normal operation".
He is demonstrably oblivious of the finer points of
how this new technology functions . . . and how it
behaves when driven to failure.
I used to have a VERY good working relationship with
a lady who worked at the Navy's battery testing facilities
in Crane, Indiana. I don't recall what her job title
was . . . maybe never knew it. But she had been there
a long time and observed a great deal of the proceedings
in her facility with interest and understanding. Best
yet, she was willing to share.
I can recall conversations that might have lasted
HOURS. She was a encyclopedia of first-hand information
about the past, present and future of battery technologies.
You think the FAA has an inordinate interest in
behaviors of batteries under duress, you should hear
what the Navy expects!
The last time we talked, I had to call her at
home where she was under hospice care for a terminal
bout of cancer. I was glad I could inform her of a very
high stature amongst many of my valued teachers.
It's a disturbing observation that so many individuals
with power over our lives are so ill prepared to
execute those jobs with reason and competence. It
follows that the execution of those duties do not
add value . . . and in fact tax value out of our
willingness and ability to do the best we know how
to do. We all wish you good fortune . . .
Bob . . .
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: | Re: Battery box being demanded |
On 02/09/2011 10:42 AM, n801bh@netzero.com wrote:
> In my experimental I used the group 24 box shown here.
> <http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?productId=102091&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&storeId=11151&storeNum=10109&subdeptNum=10548&classNum=10551>
For what it is worth, I saw what appeared to be the same battery box at
Walmart last night for $6.94.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Please use Netiquette Guidelines http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
Kindly TRIM your email replies and post AFTER the relevant text
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 |
|
> My question to the List goes to the notion of
> advising our 200 hour VFR friend that having a
> heated pitot offers any quantum improvements in
> risk-reduction.
Perhaps I wasn't clear in my post. I wasn't in icing conditions. Conditions were
CAVU. The iced pitot was caused by moisture, liquid on the ground, ice after
takeoff. There was no ice anywhere else. So my only comment was that I'd
rather land with an airspeed indicator than without one. My cost was $25 for
a used heated pitot, about $10 for a switch, plus a few feet of wire. If the
cost/benefit was calculated with a $600+ new heated pitot, I may have decided
differently. I'll stipulate that I should be able to land safely without one.
But when you look at accident reports, one thing that usually stands out is
that there was a chain of events leading to the accident. Break the chain, and
you would probably avoid the event. Landing without an airspeed indicator
is a distraction I can easily avoid.
--------
Clear Skies,
Tom Costanza
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330441#330441
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 |
|
On 02/10/2011 09:38 AM, George, Neal E Capt USAF ACC 505 TRS/DOJ wrote:
> 80-kts on downwind, 70-kts on base, and he falls out of the base-to final turn
because the ice has changed his stall speed.
>
> The point is, an accurate indicated airspeed is of little use where it matters
- near the stall end of the envelope - if you don't know what the stall speed
is in the airplane's current iced-up condition.
So assume Captain Super Stud realizes that his stall speed is affected,
and elects to maintain 90 kts on final because he is able to fly the
plane at 90kts (he just tested this on the downwind leg). Could he do
this without a working airspeed indicator? Possibly if he had a working
GPS onboard. However, by using GPS now you've thrown another variable
into the equation and another thing to deal with that the pilot might
not be familiar with (trying to fly the plane with GPS indicated speed
rather than the normal airspeed indication, and the fact that GPS
indicates ground speed not airspeed). It is just one more thing to add
to what is probably already a stressful situation. Better to do a quick
comparison prior to pattern entry of the airspeed indicator to the GPS
indicated speed to make sure it is working, and then use the normal
instruments for landing to reduce pilot workload.
IMHO a heated pitot is like insurance. You hope you never have to use
it, but it sure is handy when you do. In this case, it is pretty cheap
insurance, too.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Please use Netiquette Guidelines http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
Kindly TRIM your email replies and post AFTER the relevant text
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 |
|
Actually, it is OUR sandbox that we pay them to keep open and safe.
David
Roger wrote:
>
>
> As you say its their sand box but they still have to play by the
> rules they laid down.
>
> Noel
>
> NO, you forget that this is the government. Only you have to
> play by their rules, not them!
>
> Roger
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
> *
>
>
> *
--
If you're an American, just say NO to the Obamanation, to socialism, and get rid
of Soros.
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 |
|
Actually, it is OUR sandbox that we pay them to keep open and safe.
David
You are right, it is OUR sandbox, but they make all the
decisions. Like the rest of our government, They know what is best for us,
so we should just shut up and do as we are told.
Roger
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 18
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 |
|
> So assume Captain Super Stud realizes that his stall speed
> is affected,
>and elects to maintain 90 kts on final because he is able to fly the
>plane at 90kts (he just tested this on the downwind leg). Could he do
>this without a working airspeed indicator?
<snip>
> Better to do a quick
>comparison prior to pattern entry of the airspeed indicator to the GPS
>indicated speed to make sure it is working, and then use the normal
>instruments for landing to reduce pilot workload.
Is that your advice to the 200 hr VFR pilot? Put
on your CFI hat. Consider that the things we're
taught in the 40-hr holy-watered curriculum are
the things that work 100% of the time based on
panel displays and views out the window that
are not contaminated by an un-calibrated tightening
of the airplane's performance envelope.
It's much easier to hypothesize a course of
action based on our personal experiences and
understanding of how things work. But how would
you advise a pilot with an extension to that
40 hr curriculum? How would you demonstrate
a process and then test the student for competency
to carry out that process?
How about: No pattern flight. No impromptu "flight
testing". Straight in. Keep nose well below horizon.
If you cross the numbers at 100+kts (GPS or IAS) the
probability of a controlled arrival with the concrete
is high. Now the skill to be cultivated is directional
control during a higher speed roll out. Do you
NEED a working speed indicator to accomplish this
maneuver?
Which thought process and procedure has the
highest likelihood of a comfortable outcome?
I don't think anyone proposes to discourage anyone
from having pitot heat or any other gee-whiz.
The goal is to QUANTIFY the risk-reduction value
for having a heated pitot.
Bob . . .
Message 19
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 |
|
> Landing without an airspeed indicator is a distraction I can easily avoid.
I've had one loss-of-airspeed experience. Turned out to
be a spider nest. Initial indication was that I was
using a LOT more runway to accelerate to take-off speed.
I tentatively tested the airplane's willingness to fly
and it hopped right off. Climb out was cautiously low
in deck angle and I was still pondering what was going
on. Pretty soon, IAS indications were more 'normal' and
I turned attention to other piloting issues.
A few minutes later leveled at 8K or so, IAS was showing
190kts in a 140 horse Cherokee! Okay, IAS is snorked.
Now what? Land? Call back to the FBO to bring me a
replacement airplane? AAA wasn't answering the phone
that day.
We completed our trip out and returned the next day
without discomfort after sorting out all the indications
and developing a plan-B. I'll suggest that your
chances of loss of IAS data due to effects OTHER than
icing are far greater.
Bob . . .
Message 20
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: Pitot heat- but off topic |
do not archive
Any thoughts on the idea of flying around in clear air for some period
after an icing encounter with the intent of decreasing the amount of ice
on the aircraft before trying to land? Sufficient fuel, etc.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN
On 02/10/2011 10:37 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
>
>> So assume Captain Super Stud realizes that his stall speed is affected,
>> and elects to maintain 90 kts on final because he is able to fly the
>> plane at 90kts (he just tested this on the downwind leg). Could he do
>> this without a working airspeed indicator?
>
> <snip>
>
>> Better to do a quick
>> comparison prior to pattern entry of the airspeed indicator to the GPS
>> indicated speed to make sure it is working, and then use the normal
>> instruments for landing to reduce pilot workload.
>
> Is that your advice to the 200 hr VFR pilot? Put
> on your CFI hat. Consider that the things we're
> taught in the 40-hr holy-watered curriculum are
> the things that work 100% of the time based on
> panel displays and views out the window that
> are not contaminated by an un-calibrated tightening
> of the airplane's performance envelope.
>
> It's much easier to hypothesize a course of
> action based on our personal experiences and
> understanding of how things work. But how would
> you advise a pilot with an extension to that
> 40 hr curriculum? How would you demonstrate
> a process and then test the student for competency
> to carry out that process?
>
> How about: No pattern flight. No impromptu "flight
> testing". Straight in. Keep nose well below horizon.
> If you cross the numbers at 100+kts (GPS or IAS) the
> probability of a controlled arrival with the concrete
> is high. Now the skill to be cultivated is directional
> control during a higher speed roll out. Do you
> NEED a working speed indicator to accomplish this
> maneuver?
>
> Which thought process and procedure has the
> highest likelihood of a comfortable outcome?
> I don't think anyone proposes to discourage anyone
> from having pitot heat or any other gee-whiz.
> The goal is to QUANTIFY the risk-reduction value
> for having a heated pitot.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Message 21
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 |
|
>
> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
>
>
> Which thought process and procedure has the
> highest likelihood of a comfortable outcome?
> I don't think anyone proposes to discourage anyone
> from having pitot heat or any other gee-whiz.
> The goal is to QUANTIFY the risk-reduction value
> for having a heated pitot.
>
> Bob . . .
>
With due respect Bob, there are some things in life that are NOT
QUANTIFIABLE.
And this is one of them. Like someone said, this is like insurance! Some of
us value it, other don't.
Since this is a VERY subjective issue, neither is it quantifiable, nor
anyone of those in this List from both sides of the barricade will be
convinced by the other's arguments.
Carlos
Message 22
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 box being demanded |
I just sent my (latest) reply off to the DOT inspector. I found ST02156AK which
is an STC for supercubs. It allows for the installation of an underseat sealed
battery (Odyssey) to replace the original battery and battery box. That should
be enough justification. For the supercub case, considering the shorter and
smaller cables it saves 16 pounds.
Thanks for all your ideas and suggestion. I'll let you know what happens.
--ray
--------
Ray St-Laurent
701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330480#330480
Message 23
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 |
|
>
>
>With due respect Bob, there are some things in life that are NOT
QUANTIFIABLE.
>And this is one of them=85 Like someone said, this
>is like insurance! Some of us value it, other don=92t.
Which is exactly the point my friend. An
IAS indicator is sold to us as a highly
quantified display: "Thou shalt not snub
thy airspeed indicator lest ye be cursed
with untenable surprises." Once the numbers
have been elevated to celestial significance
it seems only natural that we protect the
integrity of those numbers with what ever
means are available to us.
The point is that no mater how good your
speed numbers are, there are other other
factors (thanks Neal) that degrade the
celestial status of the best numbers. Heated
pitot tubes protect numbers whose values
are no longer celestial due to effects of
the same ice we drove off the tube with
heaters.
>
>Since this is a VERY subjective issue, neither
>is it quantifiable, nor anyone of those in this
>List from both sides of the barricade will be
>convinced by the other=92s arguments.
Who is trying to convince anyone of anything?
The utility and usefulness of accurate IAS is
NOT a subjective issue. The simple-ideas that
drive IAS indications and aerodynamic performance
of airplanes are hard, cold fact. As successful
pilots, we strive to connect every combination
of simple-ideas into a plan of operation
completely independent of personal perceptions,
fondest wishes or misunderstanding of the physics.
I'm sorry if you're feeling barricaded. This
isn't about changing your mind about whether
or not to have a heated pitot tube. It's about
crafting a works-99%-of-the-time plan for
putting an iced airplane on the ground. How
would you advise use of IAS readings for what
might be a pilot's very first tense experience
with ice? Yeah, I've seen the pictures and read
the stories from pilots to lived to tell about
it. Many more did not. When the crews get out
to the pile of bent aluminum, the ice is often
melted. Nobody is left to tell us how they
screwed up shooting a 60 Kt approach with a
perfectly believable IAS display that was
heated for additional SAFETY.
Bob . . .
Message 24
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 |
|
On 02/10/2011 11:37 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> Is that your advice to the 200 hr VFR pilot? Put
> on your CFI hat.
Actually, it is absolutely the advice I'd give a low time pilot.
Putting on a CFI hat, the best possible thing to do for a low time pilot
is to give them an environment that they are familiar with. The more
"out of the ordinary" things you throw at them, the higher the chances
that they will mess up the landing.
Think about the scenario that you painted in previous emails. You have
a low time pilot that inadvertently ended up in icing conditions, and
there is visible ice on the airframe. The flying characteristics of the
plane have changed due to the ice, and the pilot does not know exactly
how they have changed. We have some "Top Gun Tough" pilots, but there
is a good chance that a pilot in this situation is going to be somewhat
shaken, or at least have increased anxiety.
While this pilot is preoccupied with "flying the plane" to get it to a
safe landing, would you rather throw yet another workload item for them
to deal with (ie, using GPS speed instead of airspeed), or allow them to
use the very familiar scan with the airspeed indicator that they've been
using all along? Remember, low time pilot.
I submit that it is safer to allow the pilot to use the tools and
techniques that are familiar, and not throw more unknowns into the
situation if it is at all possible to do so. That would include flying
a normal pattern to get them comfortable with the approach and mentally
prepare them for landing, but fly it at an increased speed that they
already know the airplane will fly at. Change as few things as
possible, and only those that are necessary for the safety of the
flight. For example, I'd recommend not lowering the flaps since you
don't know what affect that might have.
We should all be able to land an airplane without any speed indication
at all, especially if that were the only thing you were concerned about.
However, with an iced up airframe and completely unknown flight
characteristics, a relatively inexperienced and possibly scared pilot,
and a strong desire to get the plane on the ground, there is no need to
add the additional stress of an iced over pitot tube when it is
relatively easy and cheap to prevent it.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Please use Netiquette Guidelines http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
Kindly TRIM your email replies and post AFTER the relevant text
Message 25
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 |
|
I have had an icing experience in a U6A on an IFR flight plan. Icing conditions
were not forecasted but I started picking up ice on climb out. I was able to
climb above the cloud layer so the icing stopped but I did not lose any ice either.
As I descended for approach I picked up more ice. As the ice accumulated
the air speed decreased so I added decrease in airspeed to my approach speeds
plus a safety factor of a few knots. When I landed the stall speed was about
what I expected it to be. If I did not have a heat pitot tube what turned
out to be just a stressful event could have turned into a disaster. I would
not own a aircraft without a heated pitot tube. I have had experiences where
pitot tube ice but there was no sign of structural icing. It is just not worth
the risk of not installing a heated pitot tube and needing it just once.
Lynn Riggs, Maj Ret
USA AVN
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of George, Neal E Capt USAF ACC 505 TRS/DOJ
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 8:39 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Pitot heat
I think y'all are still missing the point.
With the airplane picking up ice, the stall speed changes with the accretion.
The type of ice, shape, amount and location all affect the performance of the
aircraft. You won't find performance parameters for your iced-up airframe in
the POH.
A few things you don't know - CAN'T know - with ice on the airframe:
1) How much ice is on the airplane? Quantify it.
2) What does the ice weigh? Again, hard numbers.
3) How fast is the ice accumulating?
4) When will the weight of ice push the airplane over gross weight?
5) When will the airplane stop flying because of the ice it has accumulated?
6) With x amount of ice on the airframe, what's the stall speed?
Let's imagine Capt Super Stud bores thru a low cloud with OAT in the teens and
finds some ice. Doesn't really matter what kind of ice - it's sticking to the
airframe and accumulating. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and a little
luck and say there's a runway close and straight ahead and he's smart enough
to choose to land. It's VFR at pattern altitude, so he joins the downwind
for a standard pattern - got it made, no sweat. 80-kts on downwind, 70-kts on
base, and he falls out of the base-to final turn because the ice has changed
his stall speed.
The point is, an accurate indicated airspeed is of little use where it matters
- near the stall end of the envelope - if you don't know what the stall speed
is in the airplane's current iced-up condition.
neal
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Prather
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Pitot heat
Hey Mr. Nuckolls..
So, my question is, what do you do after the icing encounter? Say you've been
lucky (or prudent), and extricated yourself and the contents of the airplane from
the icing conditions.. Now do you just have to go somewhere else and land
and wait for the bird to dry/thaw? What if there's an alternate route available
that avoids the icy conditions, but is less desirable for other reasons (around
the mountain range vs over the pass)? Maybe you want to gauge how much
cruise speed the airplane has lost because of the ice. Certainly GPS groundspeed
can give you an idea about the remaining performance, but being able to cross
check with IAS is nice. While I agree that a heated pitot might give some
people false confidence, it seems to me there's some utility in one.
Matt-
Message 26
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 |
|
Hi guys,
I have lost at least two and I believe three pitot systems in my career of flying.
The first time I felt cold adrenaline and fear going down my spine, so
it kind of gets your attention when the airspeed starts bleeding down to zero.
All were heated systems in a jet ironically enough. There is nothing that can
take the place of training to remedy this scenario. You MUST go out on a VFR
day with a plan to learn some basic attitude flying. What pitch attitude, power
setting and configuration give you a desired performance. I know 450 feet
per minute descent, flaps 20 and 15 inches of power will hold a 3 degree glideslope
at 90 knots in my old 182. That would be a nice speed to fly to a suitable
runway. In some heavy icing situations I would approach at cruise speed
or at least the lowest known flyable speed and land on a long runway. Remember,
if you find yourself in this scenario, you are a test pilot and that nice,
docile Cessna could have the slow speed handling characteristics of the Space
Shuttle. Don't change flap settings. Don't slow down until a safe landing is
assured even if it has to shutdown O'Hare International! Ice avoidance and aircraft
knowledge will keep you safer than pitot heat. But I do plan on pitot heat
for my aircraft.
Safe flying,
Bob S.
P.S. Angle of attack indicators are a fine backup for a pitot system should a pitot
tube suddenly be clogged by bugs or mud but icing COULD take out the ASI
and AOA gauge.
Message 27
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 box being demanded |
Thanks for the hard work on this Ray, it's a great service to a lot of
homebuilders having to face down Transport or the MD-RA.
Vern
-----Original Message-----
From: RayStL
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 10:38 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery box being demanded
I just sent my (latest) reply off to the DOT inspector. I found ST02156AK
which is an STC for supercubs. It allows for the installation of an
underseat sealed battery (Odyssey) to replace the original battery and
battery box. That should be enough justification. For the supercub case,
considering the shorter and smaller cables it saves 16 pounds.
Thanks for all your ideas and suggestion. I'll let you know what happens.
--ray
--------
Ray St-Laurent
701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330480#330480
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Message 28
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 |
|
Actually, it is absolutely the advice I'd give a low time pilot.
Putting on a CFI hat, the best possible thing to do for a low time pilot
is to give them an environment that they are familiar with.
==============
I expressed it poorly, but it's my contention it is exactly that
familiar environment that gets our subject pilot killed.
With pitot heat on and accurate airspeed indications, our pilot is in
the klag gathering ice. Descending to land, he breaks out of the cloud
deck and anxiety levels drop dramatically - simply because he can see,
but nothing else about his predicament has changed. But it's still cold
and the airframe is not shedding ice - or maybe it's "warm", but the
airframe is not shedding ice fast enough to be clean before he turns
final.
Our young pilot gets himself established on the 45-deg entry leg and
relaxes - got it made. He's back in a familiar environment and reverts
to his primal training and rote memory of the POH performance charts.
And those charts don't apply to his iced airframe.
A heated pitot might ensure that the ASI continues to function; maybe -
are the static ports heated, too? Even if the ASI is displaying
accurate data, the data is not useful because the airframe is altered
from its "tested, approved and published" configuration.
neal
Message 29
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 |
|
Actually, don't you think that the Dept of Defense that owns the GPS Satellites
trumps the FCC. after all they have a secretary of defense that has a big presence
in the cabinet. The FCC sits way down the list.
My $.02
Bob Mitchell
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 10, 2011, at 10:14 AM, "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany@verizon.net>
wrote:
>
> Actually, it is OUR sandbox that we pay them to keep open and safe.
> David
>
>
> You are right, it is OUR sandbox, but they make all the
> decisions. Like the rest of our government, They know what is best for us,
> so we should just shut up and do as we are told.
>
> Roger
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
> <winmail.dat>
Message 30
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 |
|
On 02/10/2011 03:48 PM, George, Neal E Capt USAF ACC 505 TRS/DOJ wrote:
> I expressed it poorly, but it's my contention it is exactly that
> familiar environment that gets our subject pilot killed.
Let me offer an example:
Q. Why is it that accident rates are higher for pilots transitioning to
a new (to them) aircraft?
A. Because it is different from what they are used to, and is why
insurance companies require transition training with an instructor
before allowing solo flight.
> Our young pilot gets himself established on the 45-deg entry leg and
> relaxes - got it made. He's back in a familiar environment and reverts
> to his primal training and rote memory of the POH performance charts.
I can't speak for any other pilot than myself, but I would not be
relaxed until I had the plane safely on the ground with the engine shut
down at my parking spot. Knowing that the airframe is iced, I can't
imagine anyone simply going back to rote and doing everything exactly
the same as an everyday landing, unless that person is completely
clueless and in which case they should probably not be piloting an
aircraft (and probably won't be for long...).
One or two things different and most pilots can probably handle it.
Keep adding different items, and eventually the pilot gets to a point
where they can no longer handle it, which is now approaching the case
where someone is transitioning to a new aircraft.
The idea is to only change the things that have to change for the
safety of the flight, and keep everything else as close as possible to
the same so it does not add additional distractions to flying the plane.
> A heated pitot might ensure that the ASI continues to function; maybe -
> are the static ports heated, too?
Indeed, which is why I mentioned comparing airspeed to GPS speed to
verify its working condition.
Does the plane have an alternate internal static port? If not, we were
taught to smash the VSI to make one. That would be hard to do with a
glass panel, but chances are likely if you are building a plane with an
EFIS you are probably also installing an alternate static port.
> Even if the ASI is displaying
> accurate data, the data is not useful because the airframe is altered
> from its "tested, approved and published" configuration.
I strongly disagree - knowing the airspeed is VERY useful. Otherwise,
our low time inexperienced pilot might slow to 50 kts without even
knowing it.
It seems we have enough statistics to show that pilots have enough
problems with the base to final turn WITH a working airspeed indicator,
let alone without one.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Please use Netiquette Guidelines http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
Kindly TRIM your email replies and post AFTER the relevant text
Message 31
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 |
|
As Bob K so aptly stated:
<<"Thou shalt not snub thy airspeed indicator lest ye be cursed with
untenable surprises.">>
This is the dogma that is taught at every flight school and reinforced at
every Biannual Flight Review. Unfortunately, it's a hoaks! Aircraft don't
stall at a particular airspeed, they stall at a specific angle of attack.
If you don't agree with me just roll in a 45 degree bank and haul back to
your aircraft's stall speed. Long before you get to the stall speed you
will be on your back and wondering what happened. The point that Bob K
keeps making is that with ice build up on the airframe the AOA (angle of
attack) that the wing will stall depends on the nature of the particular ice
build-up.
If you think knowing the airspeed will help you in an icing situation you
are kidding yourself unless you have tested the airspeed under the exact
conditions you are curently flying. Now that we know that, what's your plan
B for no airspeed indication or more likely, irronious airspeed indication.
There are many more causes of invalid airspeed indication than ice and they
all require a plan B to get safely on the ground.
Regards,
Bob Lee
N52BL KR2
Suwanee, GA USA
92% done only 67% to go!
Message 32
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 box being demanded |
Glad to help. I think it is almost over.
Some things are too silly to live. This was one of them.
--ray
--------
Ray St-Laurent
701/Pegastol wings/Suzuki engine
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=330527#330527
Message 33
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 |
|
On my RV-9A I'm installing both a heated pitot and an AOA indicator. Belt
and suspenders if you will. It's little extra trouble or expense in the
build process.
Really, I don't see why the arguing about this. Why not have a heated pitot
tube if it can be done easily? On a manufactured/certificated aircraft,
sure, it's a hassle to install one after the fact. On our
experimentals-especially during build-rather easily done.
I think this thread has reached the angels-dancing-on-pinheads stage.
Ralph Finch
Message 34
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 |
|
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Ralph Finch" <ralphmariafinch@gmail.com>
[snip]
Really, I don’t see why the arguing about this. [snip]
Perhaps it is too cold to fly and even too cold to build....
Message 35
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: Pitot heat- but off topic |
At 12:57 PM 2/10/2011, you wrote:
>
>do not archive
>
>Any thoughts on the idea of flying around in clear air for some
>period after an icing encounter with the intent of decreasing the
>amount of ice on the aircraft before trying to land? Sufficient fuel, etc.
Absolutely. Ice will sublimate (evaporate directly)
under the influence of flight winds. You can also
seek higher temperatures which further enhances
shedding. I think MOST icing encounters don't bring
iced airplanes all the way to the runway.
But I do recall pictures in Flying (or similar mags)
showing amazing collections of mixed ice on the leading
edges of just-arrived aircraft. It's a sure bet that
this guy's arrival wasn't a gracefully executed,
nose high, 3-point flare aided and abetted by
an accurately calibrated and trustworthy airspeed
display.
Bob . . .
Message 36
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 |
|
I have to say, reading this great exchange of pitot heat discussion and icing
has been informative but humbling. Frankly, I just never gave it that much thought.
I bought a heated pitot for my RV-10 only because I had always flown with
one. Many of them were automatically turned on with weight off wheels. These
were all military jets that could eliminate airframe icing by adding power. At
400 kts or more, ice melts right off the jet.
I have approximately 3000 hrs, mostly military, but i know little about general
aviation. Icing in GA aircraft scares me. I don't want anything to do with it.
I will turn around when icing is first encountered. Thus, Bob's discussion is
wise. It's all about cost / benefit. What is the risk reduction to heated pitot
when encountering icing particularly if you are a low time pilot.
Myself, as stated, I'd turn right around and attempt to find warmer air to melt
it off. If not, then prior to decent, after coordinating with center or approach
of course, check the slow flight handling qualities of the airplane. Pattern
altitude is the last place I want to experience unexpected behavior of the
airplane. But this might be a little too much to ask of a low time pilot not being
exposed to flying qualities evaluation as Bob stated. I really like the idea
of teaching the student that nose at or below the horizon will not result
in departure from flight. I'm going to go out and play with this some and get
familiar with this instruction approach. It has simple, valid techniques that
can be instructed to the low time pilot that will probably alway work and result
in less low experience accidents.
Keep talking because I need the education,
Tom
RV-10 wings construction
On Feb 10, 2011, at 12:46 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> At 12:57 PM 2/10/2011, you wrote:
>>
>> do not archive
>>
>> Any thoughts on the idea of flying around in clear air for some period after
an icing encounter with the intent of decreasing the amount of ice on the aircraft
before trying to land? Sufficient fuel, etc.
>
> Absolutely. Ice will sublimate (evaporate directly)
> under the influence of flight winds. You can also
> seek higher temperatures which further enhances
> shedding. I think MOST icing encounters don't bring
> iced airplanes all the way to the runway.
>
> But I do recall pictures in Flying (or similar mags)
> showing amazing collections of mixed ice on the leading
> edges of just-arrived aircraft. It's a sure bet that
> this guy's arrival wasn't a gracefully executed,
> nose high, 3-point flare aided and abetted by
> an accurately calibrated and trustworthy airspeed
> display.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
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! --
|