Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 09:50 AM - [PLEASE READ] Why I Have A Fund Raiser... (Matt Dralle)
1. 12:57 AM - Re: Mandatory U.K. LAA permit directive. Shoot-Bolt stop (Roland)
2. 01:00 AM - Re: Mandatory U.K. LAA permit directive. Shoot-Bolt stop (John Wighton)
3. 01:12 AM - Re: Re: Mandatory U.K. LAA permit directive. Shoot-Bolt stop (Brian Davies)
4. 04:35 PM - Re: Mandatory U.K. LAA permit directive. Shoot-Bolt stop (budyerly@msn.com)
Message 0
| 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: | [PLEASE READ] Why I Have A Fund Raiser... |
Since the beginning, the Matronics List and Forum experience has been free from
advertising. I have been approached by fair number of vendors wanting to tap
into the large volume of activity across the various lists hosted here, but have
always flatly refused. Everywhere you go on the Internet these days, a user
is pummeled with flashing banners and videos and ads for crap that they don't
want. Yahoo, Google and that ilk are not "free". The user must constantly
endure their barrage of commercialism thrust into their face at an ever increasing
rate. Enough is enough, and the Lists at Matronics choose not to succumb
to that.
That being said, running a service of this size is not "free". It costs a lot
of money to maintain the hardware, pay for the electricity, Commercial-greade
Internet Connection, air conditioning, maintenance contracts, etc, etc. etc.
I choose to hold a PBS-like fund raiser each year during the month of November
where I simply send out a short email every other day asking the members to make
a small contribution to support the operation. That being said, that contribution
is completely voluntary and non-compulsory. Many members choose not
to contribute and that's fine.
However, a very modest percentage of the members do choose to make a contribution
and it is that financial support that keeps the Lists running. And that's
it. To my way of thinking, it is a much more pleasant way of maintaining the
Lists and Forums. The other 11 months of the year, you don't see a single advertisement
or request for support. That's refreshing and that is a List and Forum
that I want to belong to. I think other people feel the same way.
Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support these
Lists?
https://matronics.com/contribution
Or, drop a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
581 Jeannie Way
Livermore CA 94550
USA
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Admin.
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: Mandatory U.K. LAA permit directive. Shoot-Bolt stop |
I'd found it interesting, how that safety issue was/is approached on the certified
Liberty XL2. AFAIK the door latch mechanism is quite similar to that of the
Europa.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503946#503946
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: Mandatory U.K. LAA permit directive. Shoot-Bolt stop |
SLA and FDM methods are probably both suitable for the door stop. I looked but
could not find any reference to the material or process used by the LAA on the
parts they are selling. I think that is a serious omission for an engineering
deliverable.
Maybe somebody (Clive) can find out?
The choice of material is important. Whilst doing work for a large aerospace company
based near Cambridge we found that they had specified a 3D printing process
for parts that were subjected to human waste liquids and subsequent cleaning
with bleach based products. For cost reasons the 3D parts were left bare
(no paint), a situation that could have led to the production of gases banned
under the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Having specified and used 3D printed parts over the past 23 years, l can recommend
that a surface finish is used on them. That could be primer and paint or
a thin GF or carbon ply (great for preventing surface cracks in FDM prints).
--------
John Wighton
Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503947#503947
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: Mandatory U.K. LAA permit directive. Shoot-Bolt stop |
John,
This an uncertified part for use on a non- Certificate of Airworthiness
aircraft. It is just a mechanical stop. The worst that can happen is it
will fall off. It is your responsibility to determine if it is satisfactory
for the purpose intended. If you are unhappy with it, simply make your own
part. Your advice and technical knowledge is an asset to our community but
I think it is a bit over the top be charging the LAA with " a serious
omission for a technical deliverable".
Respectfully
Brian
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Sun, Nov 7, 2021 at 8:03 AM John Wighton <john@wighton.net> wrote:
>
> SLA and FDM methods are probably both suitable for the door stop. I
> looked but could not find any reference to the material or process used by
> the LAA on the parts they are selling. I think that is a serious omission
> for an engineering deliverable.
>
> Maybe somebody (Clive) can find out?
>
> The choice of material is important. Whilst doing work for a large
> aerospace company based near Cambridge we found that they had specified a
> 3D printing process for parts that were subjected to human waste liquids
> and subsequent cleaning with bleach based products. For cost reasons the
> 3D parts were left bare (no paint), a situation that could have led to the
> production of gases banned under the Chemical Weapons Convention.
>
> Having specified and used 3D printed parts over the past 23 years, l can
> recommend that a surface finish is used on them. That could be primer and
> paint or a thin GF or carbon ply (great for preventing surface cracks in
> FDM prints).
>
> --------
> John Wighton
> Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=503947#503947
>
>
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: Mandatory U.K. LAA permit directive. Shoot-Bolt stop |
Europa Door Closing, Latching and Loss Prevention Issues:
Ive written three or 4 door instructions on hanging, hinging and locking the doors.
Many complained there werent pictures and I know what you mean. I was dreadfully
negligent about pictures.
For those with poorly fitting doors, Im sorry. They can and should close, but
to be weather tight they will be held slightly open by the rubber gasket when
lowered. To close the door, it should only need vertical pressure applied to
the door glass sill and it should lower completely and latch. A curved door should
not require a handle to be pulled in with horizontal pressure. From outside
the aircraft only a vertical force on the handle should allow the door to
lower a bit more and the handle should snap closed without a thought.
>From the inside of the aircraft, pulling the handle inboard assures only the front
door latch engages. Many put a strap/knob to pull the rear in. Ive never
needed that, but some pilots and passengers have dimensions which prohibit movement
in the cockpit to use a free hand to reach across the chest and push down
on the door. Thats life. I should have made a mod for a center finger push
area.
Mid door latches and such are nice but be careful about adding too much weight
to a door as it will have more mass when it departs and will not simply fly off
if jettisoned. If a stock door does hit the tail, it will leave a small mark
as the door is light. A heavy door will impart more force. Adding heavy knobs,
alternate struts, additional locks, massive metal door knobs, extra glass
stiffening, etc. increases mass.
If your door seals are in poor shape, replace them. I found a thinner door seal
that works adequately and makes the doors seal and close easier. The bulb dimensions
of these seals can be purchased in many dimensions. Mine is 1/16 thick
and 5/8 wide by Ebco. Its very soft and easy to install. At altitude and
speed, the doors do expand out due to aerodynamic forces and the gap at the bottom
may increase. If your shirt flies out the door, consider a different door
seal, but I just let that happen.
On the subject of door/canopy loss prevention: In my past life, my standardization
branch looked at canopy loss in our aircraft as a lack of discipline. Of
course FEAR, SARCHASM, and RIDDICULE (the three tenants of fighter training)
always kicked in and the nickname Lid, Breezy, Drafty or Topless kept the discipline
of assuring the canopy was locked somewhat in the forefront of ones mind.
What we actually did was analyze the canopy locking mechanism from a maintenance
and operations standpoint, made/revised checklist procedures, trained,
educated, informed, and finally pushed on the damn canopy to assure it was locked.
However, sometimes pilots were in a hurry to blast off, and occasionally
checklist procedures failed. Spending millions to change the aircraft was not
done.
Loss of door/canopy is not exclusive to the Europa. Recently our local FBO had
three door departures on their Cessna 162 Sky Catcher, as the front and rear latches
seldom both engage, the door flew open with such force it dented the wing
under skin, departed the aircraft and hit the horizontal tail. A third latch
was installed, but in reality, the third latch made the pilots pause for a
moment and look to see if the pin latches engaged properly. Of course, if the
latch pins were engaged, and the safety catch latched and one had to get out
of the aircraft, the pilot had to undo two latches. In a forced landing or crash
the door tends to bind on the auxiliary latch and exit is near impossible.
(Although leaning over after unstrapping and kicking the door does work.) I
have many other stories on canopies and doors.
We should share or instruct what we have learned to assist/warn/educate our less
experienced aviators when appropriate rather than be forced by regulation to
modify our aircraft to prevent pilot mistakes.
So, how does this latest LAA Mod SM15833 affect us in our little fiberglass wonder?
Ive always been keen to apply the required modifications of the LAA or Europa
Aircraft (unless I had already done my own prototype and found it satisfactory)
as the mods were generally from the field, well thought out, and execution of
the mod would improve safety and/or protect the unaware pilot/owner/operator.
I fly with many others and even after an extended briefing, demonstration,
practice and evaluation, customers/passengers fail to latch the door or apply
proper closing technique. Many just never get that the door is curved and apply
all the force on the handle to pull in on the door in or worse yet, slam it.
Closing force on a hinged door is 90 degrees to the hinges right, so pulling
in on the door doesn't align the latches, it bends the door and squishes the
door seal.
I must say it is unnerving that our aircraft is being modified by an unelected
bureaucratic office which also produces and sells the approved product. The intent
is admirable, but the one size fits all execution bears some consideration
that many have already wisely professed. From a purely outsiders look at what
on the surface appears to be a viable safety solution, I see the following:
1. The installation is interesting as the bolt holes one must drill, seem a bit
high. Placed where I looked on an airplane in the shop, the bolts may penetrate
the upper part of the shoot bolt guide. (My measurements put the Mod lower
than shown as I push down on the door.)
2. Since the door is flexible, it appears that if the door latch handle is forward/down
(pins out), when the door is closed, and one simply pulls the latch aft,
inward and reengages it to catch the forward guide hole, the rear latch may
not latch or may be proud of the teardrop even on a properly fit door. My issue
is only if the uneducated operator simply pulls IN on the front handle and
slams it forward.
3. Plastic is not my first choice for a robust part when a door may be blown closed
or inadvertently dropped and the shoot bolt may impact it as plastic may
be easily damaged. Then again, it need not be made of steel or depleted uranium.
4. I am concerned about exact fit and finish of the part for not only cosmetics
but also longevity. To look finished, one must do filler/primer/paint for a
clean non mildew, UV, fading/yellowing part that is exposed to the elements.
My fear is impacting the plastic part will crack it around the perimeter.
5. The Europa Classic has more glass than the XS in the door latch area so the
screws can easily be tightened but on the XS I would prefer to imbed more than
just a ring of Redux to hold the nuts and screws from crushing the foam.
6. I am not a fan of the screw head on my door inner door flange, but I understand.
It would be nice to have countersunk screws from the inside into the (teardrop)
threaded in.
7. Stripes on the handle as a warning? OK, but why doesnt the door have a mandatory
placard on how to open and close the door also? Red Triangle on the exterior
for emergency opening. I could go on and on with safety placards.
8. Down time and cost of install for those not blessed with maintenance ability
can be considerable to make this look good.
Since I have not installed this Mod it is not my place to criticize the LAA and
its good but one size fits all solution. Since it is mandatory for the UK, time
will tell if it affects the door loss issue in the UK. I do believe one should
hold the LAA accountable if the mod fails. At least one would expect the
LAA to give you all your money back.
Cost of this mod for most is not an issue as we know aircraft parts are expensive
and this part cost is quite reasonable. I will continue in the States to push
with some force on my doors to assure proper latching (pilot side with my
left elbow and pax side by pushing just aft of the headrest) and take a wait and
look see attitude on this mod as I dont have a better full proof idea either.
I tend to lean more on education, training and understanding but in the civilian
community I can see the LAAs concern as civil pilot uniformity of training
is like herding cats.
I applaud the simplicity of the mod and in most cases, if properly installed, I
believe it will work, not add weight nor be a detrimental increase in drag.
It is a bit FUGLY. Although making this with an integral key latch may be an
interesting idea. Can you Mod a Mod?
Bud Yerly
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=504027#504027
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! --
|