Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:13 AM - Please Make a Contribution to Support Your Lists... (Matt Dralle)
1. 04:54 AM - Re: Dan Loyd (gary)
2. 05:13 AM - Re: Dan Loyd (James Hein)
3. 05:41 AM - Re: Fuel line bend radius (MauleDriver)
4. 05:49 AM - Re: Dan Loyd (Tim Olson)
5. 05:54 AM - Re: Fuel line bend radius (Tim Olson)
6. 05:59 AM - Trip report from Nellis Show (Tim Olson)
7. 06:38 AM - Re: Fuel line bend radius (William Curtis)
8. 07:45 AM - N289DT Accident (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
9. 08:14 AM - Re: N289DT Accident (Rick Sked)
10. 09:04 AM - Upper gear leg fairing attach? (Chris Johnston)
11. 09:09 AM - Re: N289DT Accident (Dj Merrill)
12. 10:01 AM - Re: N289DT Accident (Pascal)
13. 10:09 AM - Re: baggage area tie downs (Dave Saylor)
14. 12:18 PM - Leg fairing hinges? (Chris Johnston)
15. 01:29 PM - Tail Longeron bending (Bob Leffler)
16. 01:34 PM - Re: Upper gear leg fairing attach? (Jesse Saint)
17. 01:38 PM - Re: Leg fairing hinges? (Jesse Saint)
18. 02:19 PM - Re: Tail Longeron bending (Pascal)
19. 02:32 PM - Re: Tail Longeron bending (Bob Leffler)
20. 02:39 PM - Re: Tail Longeron bending (John Jessen)
21. 02:40 PM - Re: Tail Longeron bending (Patrick ONeill)
22. 02:53 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (Tim Olson)
23. 03:39 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (KiloPapa)
24. 03:44 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (McGANN, Ron)
25. 03:56 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
26. 04:03 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (gary)
27. 04:04 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (Tim Olson)
28. 04:19 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (David McNeill)
29. 04:32 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (Deems Davis)
30. 05:59 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (GRANSCOTT@aol.com)
31. 06:05 PM - Pullable 60 Amp Breaker (Tim Lewis)
32. 06:10 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (Rick Sked)
33. 06:20 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (Chris)
34. 06:23 PM - Re: N289DT Accident ()
35. 06:37 PM - Re: Tail Longeron bending (Pascal)
36. 06:38 PM - Re: N289DT Accident (Pascal)
37. 06:41 PM - cowl (David McNeill)
38. 07:02 PM - Re: cowl (Tim Olson)
39. 07:14 PM - Re: cowl (Chris and Susie McGough)
40. 08:37 PM - Re: Upper gear leg fairing attach? (DejaVu)
41. 08:46 PM - Re: cowl (DejaVu)
42. 09:09 PM - FW: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes (Les Kearney)
43. 10:04 PM - Re: Trip report from Nellis Show (ddddsp1@juno.com)
44. 10:10 PM - Re: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes (John W. Cox)
45. 10:20 PM - Re: Trip report from Nellis Show (Tim Olson)
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 Make a Contribution to Support Your Lists... |
Just a reminder that November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Please make a Contribution
today to support the continued operation and upgrade of these great
List services!! And pick up a really nice free gift with your qualifying Contribution
too!
The Contribution Site is fast and easy:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
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 |
|
I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do we
know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just curious
if any thing suspicious was found.
Gary
40274
Painting
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 |
|
The only information I know of was posted by Jan Eggenfellner on the
Eggenfellner newsgroup on 11/9/2007:
Here is his words:
------------------
Until we know more about Dan and his accident we all agree that he was a
wonderful person and good pilot. Anything else is speculation and I
will not have it. I will offer the little that I do know however. So
far the only news are from the video where the engine was described as
running and the airplane in a slight banked turn. I also know that an
aileron trim was worked on to make the airplane fly straight along with
moving the batteries from the aft part of the airplane, to the front
tunnell area, the night before. This flight was suposed to be the test
flight to confirm the workings of the changes made the night before,
prior to flying with more people onboard. I have not yet been contacted
by the FAA or NTSB regarding any possible engine issue.
I have had requests from some that feel we should delete Dan from our
web pages. Not at all in agreement with this and would actually like to
selebrate his life, smiles and happy personality for all to
see. However, this is just my opinion and I will remove some pictures.
Jan
---------------------
gary wrote:
>
>I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do we
>know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just curious
>if any thing suspicious was found.
>
>Gary
>40274
>Painting
>
>
>
>
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: Fuel line bend radius |
This looks like a good way to stay with hard lines so I just ordered
some bulkhead fittings to do it. Thanks for the pic showing how the
control system sits in there in the tunnel.
2 Questions - what is the second run of 1/4" tubing for?
Where did you get the aluminum washers? Did you fabricate?
Thanks
Bill Watson
#40605
William Curtis wrote:
>
> Forgot I had a picture of this on my site.
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/08fuselage/fuselage37l.html
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>
>>
>> I like those a lot. I thought about the same approach. May take it.
>> Thanks David and Chris
>> do not archive
>>
>>
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 |
|
There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything
in regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers.
But, there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider
great background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss
at this time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first?
On one hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to
hear while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there
are people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like
"XYZ nut was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated
from airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site".
I'm just having problems coming to terms with when is the right time
for us.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
gary wrote:
>
> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do we
> know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just curious
> if any thing suspicious was found.
>
> Gary
> 40274
> Painting
>
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: Fuel line bend radius |
Bill...those are the brake lines.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
MauleDriver wrote:
>
> This looks like a good way to stay with hard lines so I just ordered
> some bulkhead fittings to do it. Thanks for the pic showing how the
> control system sits in there in the tunnel.
>
> 2 Questions - what is the second run of 1/4" tubing for?
> Where did you get the aluminum washers? Did you fabricate?
>
> Thanks
> Bill Watson
> #40605
>
>
> William Curtis wrote:
>>
>> Forgot I had a picture of this on my site.
>> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/08fuselage/fuselage37l.html
>>
>> William
>> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>> -------- Original Message --------
>>
>>>
>>> I like those a lot. I thought about the same approach. May take
>>> it. Thanks David and Chris
>>> do not archive
>>>
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: | Trip report from Nellis Show |
I never got around to letting y'all know I got done writing up the
stuff from the Nellis trip.
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20071111/index.html
There are still a few pictures I wanted to add in yet, but otherwise
it's done.
The entire time was a great time, including the show, even though you'll
see I got a bit ticked off that day. ;) It was great to get to see the
RV-10 builders, and I'd never seen the Stealth fighter on the ground
before. The F-35 was even there too.
Can't wait until the next trip now. Not sure where that will be. Once
we get to Jan/Feb we'll probably stay home a lot for some skiing, but
we may have an opportunity around the holidays.
Enjoy,
Tim
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
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: Fuel line bend radius |
For those that would consider the bulkhead fittings; 90 degree fittings are best
for the Andair valve, and 45 degree fittings for the stock valve.
Since the bulkhead holes are 3/4 inches, you will have to fabricate 2 - 1 1/4"
OD X 9/16" ID washers from 0.063" aluminum.
Bill,
If you click on "Next Picture" from the below link you will see the plumbing for
the fuel transfer pumps that attach those second 1/4" fittings. These pumps
will transfer fuel from the wings tanks to a main tank behind the baggage bulkhead
to maintain preset levels of 3, 5 or 8 gallons. Under "normal" conditions
engine is fed from this main tank. If the pumps or electric should fail, I
would revert to manual tank switching.
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/9XOther/RV10FuelPlumb.pdf
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
>
> This looks like a good way to stay with hard lines so I just ordered
> some bulkhead fittings to do it. Thanks for the pic showing how the
> control system sits in there in the tunnel.
>
> 2 Questions - what is the second run of 1/4" tubing for?
> Where did you get the aluminum washers? Did you fabricate?
>
> Thanks
> Bill Watson
> #40605
>
>
> William Curtis wrote:
> >
> > Forgot I had a picture of this on my site.
> > http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/08fuselage/fuselage37l.html
> >
> > William
> > http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> >
> >>
> >> I like those a lot. I thought about the same approach. May take it.
> >> Thanks David and Chris
> >> do not archive
> >>
> >>
>
>
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 |
|
Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's probable findings.
This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows when. As of yesterday
they still haven't released a preliminary report on N289DT which means they
still haven't found a probable cause, or at least haven't compiled it into
a prelim report.
I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless they had
firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight. I also really don't
expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information because of legal reasons,
so don't look to him for any data. Not suggesting anything, just a fact of
business.
There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision making process
up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand knowledge of any bad decisions
or shortcuts being made, and I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt
until proven wrong, but there was too much chatter before this to ignore.
The fact is only one of two things caused this accident, either mechanical or
pilot failures or a combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad
decision in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way. It's that
compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to bite someone in the
ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people having a bad day.
So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the speculation
to a minimum. It is important to remember however that it will take a level
of speculation and assumption to get to a conclusion without a VERY clear factor
to lead us to an undeniable cause. Even the NTSB will make some assumptions
to get to a conclusion. I doubt there will be a single smoking gun in this
accident but you never know. I suggest this because there are several other
people out there looking at installing an alternative engine and we can't deny
the fact that the install of an alternative engine in this case probably had
a contributing factor. I think it is important for those people to have information
available to help them with their decision making process on their own
installs.
Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the event,
the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to the firewall.
We know the standard battery location was chosen for CG considerations. He was
using two batteries but I'm not sure of the size. We know the engine was running
within a minute or so of the impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration
with low fuel and no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority
in a flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to accommodate
the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the Egg FWF package
is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much less than the standard
540 configuration once all the accessories are added.
I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let this go out
of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list I have had numerous
personal conversations with Dan. He and I went through the process on choosing
an engine at the same time. Even though we came to different conclusions
there was always an understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
respected that.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything
in regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers.
But, there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider
great background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss
at this time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first?
On one hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to
hear while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there
are people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like
"XYZ nut was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated
from airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site".
I'm just having problems coming to terms with when is the right time
for us.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
gary wrote:
>
> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do we
> know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just curious
> if any thing suspicious was found.
>
> Gary
> 40274
> Painting
>
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: N289DT Accident |
Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like myself have
speculated privately about what happened but without substantiation. I hope that
the cause is found and disseminated to everyone to prevent future tragedies.
If Dan was able, he would post what happened during those last minutes to get
the word out so the same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident
has personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on aviation
and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several Aviation Safety
magazines. They all promote thinking and provide insight to staying alive and
flying, but all those reports and stories never left a pit in my gut like this
one.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's probable findings.
This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows when. As of yesterday
they still haven't released a preliminary report on N289DT which means they
still haven't found a probable cause, or at least haven't compiled it into
a prelim report.
I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless they had
firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight. I also really don't
expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information because of legal reasons,
so don't look to him for any data. Not suggesting anything, just a fact of
business.
There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision making process
up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand knowledge of any bad decisions
or shortcuts being made, and I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt
until proven wrong, but there was too much chatter before this to ignore.
The fact is only one of two things caused this accident, either mechanical or
pilot failures or a combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad
decision in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way. It's that
compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to bite someone in the
ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people having a bad day.
So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the speculation
to a minimum. It is important to remember however that it will take a level
of speculation and assumption to get to a conclusion without a VERY clear factor
to lead us to an undeniable cause. Even the NTSB will make some assumptions
to get to a conclusion. I doubt there will be a single smoking gun in this
accident but you never know. I suggest this because there are several other
people out there looking at installing an alternative engine and we can't deny
the fact that the install of an alternative engine in this case probably had
a contributing factor. I think it is important for those people to have information
available to help them with their decision making process on their own
installs.
Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the event,
the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to the firewall.
We know the standard battery location was chosen for CG considerations. He was
using two batteries but I'm not sure of the size. We know the engine was running
within a minute or so of the impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration
with low fuel and no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority
in a flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to accommodate
the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the Egg FWF package
is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much less than the standard
540 configuration once all the accessories are added.
I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let this go out
of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list I have had numerous
personal conversations with Dan. He and I went through the process on choosing
an engine at the same time. Even though we came to different conclusions
there was always an understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
respected that.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything
in regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers.
But, there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider
great background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss
at this time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first?
On one hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to
hear while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there
are people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like
"XYZ nut was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated
from airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site".
I'm just having problems coming to terms with when is the right time
for us.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
gary wrote:
>
> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do we
> know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just curious
> if any thing suspicious was found.
>
> Gary
> 40274
> Painting
>
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: | Upper gear leg fairing attach? |
hey all -
perhaps a dumb question. big surprise. can someone enlighten me as to
the method of attach of the upper gear leg fairing? The plans say screw
#6 1/2 SS SMS 3 places, and AN509-8R8 K1000-08 AN426AD3-3.5 (1place). I
found stainless screws in the kit, but i'm thinking they're not the
right ones. and what about nutplates for those 3 places? I don't get
it. I thought that this must've confounded others, but a search of the
archives didn't turn up anything. when i look inside the aircraft where
these screws are supposed to go, it's not immediately apparent to me how
it goes together. Are these "SMS" screws special? does "SMS" stand for
"Super Magic Screw"?
one additional question... does anyone think it would be a problem to do
the upper gear leg intersections later, and with weight on the wheels?
the fairings sent to me by Vans for this area more closely resemble
lasagna noodles than fairings, and i thought i might buy new ones from
Fairings Etc. The problem is, that would take more time, and I'm trying
to get these #@$!%!! fairings done so i can hang the engine! I kind of
feel like I'm eating all my broccoli so I can get dessert. thoughts?
cj
(currently doing fairings - so call me Sandy)
#40410
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
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: N289DT Accident |
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
>I suggest this because there are several other people out there looking at installing
an alternative engine and we can't deny the fact that the install of an
alternative engine in this case probably had a contributing factor.
Hi Michael,
Not to quibble too much, but until we have actual evidence it is
completely unreasonable to assume the installation of an alternative
engine had any contributing factor. For all we know it could be as
simple as a screwdriver got caught in the aileron controls.
I mean no offense, but in my opinion your statement above crosses
completely into the speculation and WAG zone.
Perhaps Tim is right, and we should wait for the NTSB preliminary
report. We all want to find out what happened, but it is all too easy
to start "suggesting" the direction the finger should point when we
don't have any data and aren't directly involved in the investigation.
-Dj
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: N289DT Accident |
I tend to agree that we can help each other out and that is generally the
purpose of the NTSB articles I receive montly. The NTSB report and a
commentary on ways it could have been avoided.
As far as making assumptions, we could certainly say the CG was out due to
the battery, the engine was different, but in this case it was a Suburu and
Eggenfeller has many of these flying (not the 3.0 of course) without an
issue, also speaking to a CART mechanic (works on the race carts- step below
the NASCAR not go-carts) he said the 3.0 turbo Suburu engine is designed to
be revved this high without a problem, certainly not within 100 hours
anyway.. UNLESS the engine was rebuilt with new custom parts that were not
tested completely.. so on and so forth.
Let's wait on the "official" report and take it apart so we CAN all learn
from, sadly, someone elses accident but I agree discussing assumptions may
help some but it's like gossip, without it being true it's actually harmful.
Pascal
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44 AM
Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>
> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary report on
> N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable cause, or at least
> haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>
> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless they
> had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight. I also
> really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information because of
> legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not suggesting
> anything, just a fact of business.
>
> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision making
> process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand knowledge of any bad
> decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer to give people the benefit
> of the doubt until proven wrong, but there was too much chatter before
> this to ignore. The fact is only one of two things caused this accident,
> either mechanical or pilot failures or a combination of both. Every
> single one of us has made a bad decision in aviation but 99% of the time
> it ends in a benign way. It's that compounding of small problems that can
> rapidly sneak up to bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of
> smart people having a bad day.
>
> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that it
> will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a conclusion
> without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable cause. Even the
> NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a conclusion. I doubt there
> will be a single smoking gun in this accident but you never know. I
> suggest this because there are several other people out there looking at
> installing an alternative engine and we can't deny the fact that the
> install of an alternative engine in this case probably had a contributing
> factor. I think it is important for those people to have information
> available to help them with their decision making process on their own
> installs.
>
> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to the
> firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for CG
> considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of the size.
> We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the impact. We
> know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and no passengers it
> is possible to run out of elevator authority in a flair. We also know
> that there were many modifications FWF to accommodate the Egg engine.
> Does anyone know what the weight of the Egg FWF package is? I thought I
> recall Dan telling me it wasn't much less than the standard 540
> configuration once all the accessories are added.
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let this
> go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list I have had
> numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went through the
> process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even though we came to
> different conclusions there was always an understanding on why each of us
> made our decision and we both respected that.
>
> Michael
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>
>
> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything
> in regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
> Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers.
> But, there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider
> great background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss
> at this time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first?
> On one hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to
> hear while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there
> are people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like
> "XYZ nut was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated
> from airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site".
> I'm just having problems coming to terms with when is the right time
> for us.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> gary wrote:
>>
>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do we
>> know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just
>> curious
>> if any thing suspicious was found.
>>
>> Gary
>> 40274
>> Painting
>>
>
>
>
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: | baggage area tie downs |
Jay,
Can you send me a shipping address?
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rowe
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: baggage area tie downs
Dave: Please send me a set of four tiedowns. Tell me the total $ including
shipping and I'll get a check in the mail. Jay Rowe #40301.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave <mailto:Dave@AirCraftersLLC.com> Saylor
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 3:26 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: baggage area tie downs
Here are some picture of tiedowns I made out of hinge material. We're
getting ready to make these available for sale--they should be on the
website in a few days. Price will be $49 for a set of 4. I've had 72#
strapped down for all my phase one so far and they're working great. The
return on the movable side is to keep it up above carpet level.
Let me know if you need a set. We'll have a couple other RV-10 specific
products online soon.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David McNeill
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 11:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: baggage area tie downs
Anyone placed anchor points in the baggage area to secure the tool box,
suitcases, etc? photos?
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_____
Free Release Date: 10/28/2007 1:58 PM
<http://promos.hotbar.com/promos/promodll.dll?RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=21098&pa
rtner=seekmo> Upgrade Your Email - Click here!
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: | Leg fairing hinges? |
hey all -
question #3 for the day... The finishing plans are a bit light on the
detail, and when it specifies the hinges for the leg fairings, for the
main gear, it doesn't give a part number at all, and for the nose leg
fairing, it says "hinge .063". I was getting ready to use a regular ole
aluminum hinge (like everywhere else) but i noticed the steel hinges
have that part number on the sticker. i thought those were only for the
cowl. so, anyone care to enlighten me as to which hinges are supposed
to be used for the leg fairings? also, is the nosewheel fairing the
same as the main leg fairings? sheesh. i need some help here...
thanks
cj
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Chris Johnston
Sent: Sun 11/18/2007 9:03 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Upper gear leg fairing attach?
hey all -
perhaps a dumb question. big surprise. can someone enlighten me as to
the method of attach of the upper gear leg fairing? The plans say screw
#6 1/2 SS SMS 3 places, and AN509-8R8 K1000-08 AN426AD3-3.5 (1place). I
found stainless screws in the kit, but i'm thinking they're not the
right ones. and what about nutplates for those 3 places? I don't get
it. I thought that this must've confounded others, but a search of the
archives didn't turn up anything. when i look inside the aircraft where
these screws are supposed to go, it's not immediately apparent to me how
it goes together. Are these "SMS" screws special? does "SMS" stand for
"Super Magic Screw"?
one additional question... does anyone think it would be a problem to do
the upper gear leg intersections later, and with weight on the wheels?
the fairings sent to me by Vans for this area more closely resemble
lasagna noodles than fairings, and i thought i might buy new ones from
Fairings Etc. The problem is, that would take more time, and I'm trying
to get these #@$!%!! fairings done so i can hang the engine! I kind of
feel like I'm eating all my broccoli so I can get dessert. thoughts?
cj
(currently doing fairings - so call me Sandy)
#40410
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
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: | Tail Longeron bending |
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I must
either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
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: | Upper gear leg fairing attach? |
Maybe "Sheet Metal Screw", the pointy kind. The screws that hold the upper
intersection fairing are not machine screws. If I remember correctly, you
just drill a hole an screw in a sheet metal screw to hold it on.
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Johnston
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 12:03 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Upper gear leg fairing attach?
hey all -
perhaps a dumb question. big surprise. can someone enlighten me as to the
method of attach of the upper gear leg fairing? The plans say screw #6 1/2
SS SMS 3 places, and AN509-8R8 K1000-08 AN426AD3-3.5 (1place). I found
stainless screws in the kit, but i'm thinking they're not the right ones.
and what about nutplates for those 3 places? I don't get it. I thought
that this must've confounded others, but a search of the archives didn't
turn up anything. when i look inside the aircraft where these screws are
supposed to go, it's not immediately apparent to me how it goes together.
Are these "SMS" screws special? does "SMS" stand for "Super Magic Screw"?
one additional question... does anyone think it would be a problem to do the
upper gear leg intersections later, and with weight on the wheels? the
fairings sent to me by Vans for this area more closely resemble lasagna
noodles than fairings, and i thought i might buy new ones from Fairings Etc.
The problem is, that would take more time, and I'm trying to get these
#@$!%!! fairings done so i can hang the engine! I kind of feel like I'm
eating all my broccoli so I can get dessert. thoughts?
cj
(currently doing fairings - so call me Sandy)
#40410
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
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: | Leg fairing hinges? |
I believe the leg fairing hinges are the very thin steel hinges. The hinge
between the two cowling halves are the aluminum hinges with steel pins, and
the hinges that hold the cowling to the firewall/airplane are the 1/8"
Aluminum hinges with aluminum pins, for which you make steel hinge pins of
different sizes for the different locations. This is all from memory,
without looking at the plans, but this is what I remember off hand.
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Johnston
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 3:18 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Leg fairing hinges?
hey all -
question #3 for the day... The finishing plans are a bit light on the
detail, and when it specifies the hinges for the leg fairings, for the main
gear, it doesn't give a part number at all, and for the nose leg fairing, it
says "hinge .063". I was getting ready to use a regular ole aluminum hinge
(like everywhere else) but i noticed the steel hinges have that part number
on the sticker. i thought those were only for the cowl. so, anyone care to
enlighten me as to which hinges are supposed to be used for the leg
fairings? also, is the nosewheel fairing the same as the main leg fairings?
sheesh. i need some help here...
thanks
cj
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Chris Johnston
Sent: Sun 11/18/2007 9:03 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Upper gear leg fairing attach?
hey all -
perhaps a dumb question. big surprise. can someone enlighten me as to the
method of attach of the upper gear leg fairing? The plans say screw #6 1/2
SS SMS 3 places, and AN509-8R8 K1000-08 AN426AD3-3.5 (1place). I found
stainless screws in the kit, but i'm thinking they're not the right ones.
and what about nutplates for those 3 places? I don't get it. I thought
that this must've confounded others, but a search of the archives didn't
turn up anything. when i look inside the aircraft where these screws are
supposed to go, it's not immediately apparent to me how it goes together.
Are these "SMS" screws special? does "SMS" stand for "Super Magic Screw"?
one additional question... does anyone think it would be a problem to do the
upper gear leg intersections later, and with weight on the wheels? the
fairings sent to me by Vans for this area more closely resemble lasagna
noodles than fairings, and i thought i might buy new ones from Fairings Etc.
The problem is, that would take more time, and I'm trying to get these
#@$!%!! fairings done so i can hang the engine! I kind of feel like I'm
eating all my broccoli so I can get dessert. thoughts?
cj
(currently doing fairings - so call me Sandy)
#40410
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Tail Longeron bending |
I recall putting it on a vise and hitting it with a mallet, bend rather
easily for me. I started close to the bending point and once I had the
slight bend hit it hard a couple of times a little farther out. Pretty
much followed the plans, as I recall.
If you have it positioned solidly in a vise hit it hard to get the
initial bend going, should be easy after that.
Pascal
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Leffler
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 1:26 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I
must either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Tail Longeron bending |
The answer was obviously, just use a heavier mallet. I ran out a bought a
much larger rubber mallet and bending became a non-issue.
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I must
either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
__________ NOD32 2665 (20071117) Information __________
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: | Tail Longeron bending |
Pascal has it right. You might take a look at my pictures here:
http://www.soundingsresearch.com/RV-10/Empennage/Tailcone/Tailcone06.htm
Use a shot filled mallet. Don't be shy. Just stress it in the right
direction and whack it just in front of the vice jaws where you have it
secured using the plastic or aluminum jaw inserts. Take your time and don't
be nervous about it. It will bend.
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
I recall putting it on a vise and hitting it with a mallet, bend rather
easily for me. I started close to the bending point and once I had the
slight bend hit it hard a couple of times a little farther out. Pretty much
followed the plans, as I recall.
If you have it positioned solidly in a vise hit it hard to get the initial
bend going, should be easy after that.
Pascal
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Leffler <mailto:rv@thelefflers.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 1:26 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I must
either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navi
gator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
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 |
|
| Subject: | Tail Longeron bending |
Be sure to preload it. I was timid about bending it at first and the mallet
blows would slightly deflect the longeron but it would snap right back. If
you preload it well first(bend it in the desired direction of bend with your
free hand until it begins to strongly resist you), it bends very easily with
each tap. So much so that I could see the bend occur with each blow. Once
I figured out the preload amount, it was pretty easy to get the bend and
correct any over bend and 90 degree deflection in the angle.
Just make sure that you have the bend mark aligned precisely where it is
secured in the vise and it should go smoothly. If you go a little over, you
can bend it back without issue (but try to minimize the mount of bends so
you don't overstress the material.) Just follow the same procedure.
At first I was not looking forward to this step, but after doing it, it was
one of the easier and less problem prone tasks.
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 1:27 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I must
either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
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: N289DT Accident |
Ok folks, I've received enough encouragement offline to share the story
that I think it's time for limited distribution. You have no idea how
many people who are nearing their first flight are becoming nervous,
and how many wives of builders are starting to second-guess their
projects. This accident has touched some people pretty deeply and
there is very understandable concern that they would just like to hear
more information to give them something to understand the situation a
bit.
I warn you that you aren't going to find any smoking guns in the story,
so for those wanting that sort of thing, it's not here. But, the story
does provide numerous opportunities for observation and introspection
for the builder, to perhaps give you something to nudge you to do the
proper thing if the time ever hits you. Truly, attitudes are a critical
part of safe flying. Even on my first flight, I had the opportunity
to take off with a battery warning because I hadn't clicked in my
alternator control wire plug tight enough. I thought briefly about just
doing "once around the patch", but my conscience (developed from reading
so many "aftermath" reports) got the best of me and I decided to do the
right thing and fix it before I took off. As you read the story
you will see some reasonings that may shed light for you a bit.
I ask of all of you to treat this with the utmost respect, because there
are still living members of his family that have deep feelings.
Understanding accidents is important, and so is preservation of
their well being. So to help meet these needs, I have made this a
link that you will need to log in to read. This is made only
semi-public to limit it's distribution to only RV-10 builders.
Please do not distribute further for the time being.
With that said, please feel free to read the following synopsis, and not
use it to draw "smoking gun" conclusions. I do feel though that you
will develop somewhat of an understanding. Be aware that nobody is
immune to this sort of thought process, so it is up to you and all of
us to not become the second fatality in our RV-10 family.
Here is the link:
http://www.myrv10.com/builders/N289DT_accident.html
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rick Sked wrote:
>
> Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like
> myself have speculated privately about what happened but without
> substantiation. I hope that the cause is found and disseminated to
> everyone to prevent future tragedies. If Dan was able, he would post
> what happened during those last minutes to get the word out so the
> same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident has
> personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on
> aviation and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several
> Aviation Safety magazines. They all promote thinking and provide
> insight to staying alive and flying, but all those reports and
> stories never left a pit in my gut like this one.
>
> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "RV Builder (Michael
> Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net> To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent:
> Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
> Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>
> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary
> report on N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable
> cause, or at least haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>
> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless
> they had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight.
> I also really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information
> because of legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not
> suggesting anything, just a fact of business.
>
> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision
> making process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand
> knowledge of any bad decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer
> to give people the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but there
> was too much chatter before this to ignore. The fact is only one of
> two things caused this accident, either mechanical or pilot failures
> or a combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad
> decision in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way.
> It's that compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to
> bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people
> having a bad day.
>
> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that
> it will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a
> conclusion without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable
> cause. Even the NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a
> conclusion. I doubt there will be a single smoking gun in this
> accident but you never know. I suggest this because there are
> several other people out there looking at installing an alternative
> engine and we can't deny the fact that the install of an alternative
> engine in this case probably had a contributing factor. I think it
> is important for those people to have information available to help
> them with their decision making process on their own installs.
>
> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to
> the firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for
> CG considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of
> the size. We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the
> impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and
> no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority in a
> flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to
> accommodate the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the
> Egg FWF package is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much
> less than the standard 540 configuration once all the accessories are
> added.
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let
> this go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list
> I have had numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went
> through the process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even
> though we came to different conclusions there was always an
> understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
> respected that.
>
> Michael
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>
>
> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything
> in regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
> Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers. But,
> there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider great
> background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss at this
> time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first? On one
> hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to hear
> while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there are
> people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like "XYZ nut
> was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated from
> airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site". I'm just having
> problems coming to terms with when is the right time for us.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>
>
> gary wrote:
>>
>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but
>> do we know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation,
>> just curious if any thing suspicious was found.
>>
>> Gary 40274 Painting
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
Let the investigators investigate. Trying to discuss possible causes in
this forum without accurate and reliable information or knowledge is
irresponsible. As suggested earlier, speculation and WAG's have no place
here (even though some will not likely stay away from it.)
Kevin
40494
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 |
|
Tim,
Congratulations - that is the most inspired piece of writing I have seen
in a long, long time. I am sure there are many of us who are becoming
frustrated with just how long it takes to complete this project and I
can imagine how easy it could become to compromise on quality and safety
to 'just get it done'. It is sad that it takes a loss to our building
family to hammer the point home.
You have done well my friend. You have convinced me to take as long as
it takes, to build to my best ability, and receive the training that I
know I need.
Regards,
Ron
187 - finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Monday, 19 November 2007 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
Ok folks, I've received enough encouragement offline to share the story
that I think it's time for limited distribution. You have no idea how
many people who are nearing their first flight are becoming nervous, and
how many wives of builders are starting to second-guess their projects.
This accident has touched some people pretty deeply and there is very
understandable concern that they would just like to hear more
information to give them something to understand the situation a bit.
I warn you that you aren't going to find any smoking guns in the story,
so for those wanting that sort of thing, it's not here. But, the story
does provide numerous opportunities for observation and introspection
for the builder, to perhaps give you something to nudge you to do the
proper thing if the time ever hits you. Truly, attitudes are a critical
part of safe flying. Even on my first flight, I had the opportunity to
take off with a battery warning because I hadn't clicked in my
alternator control wire plug tight enough. I thought briefly about just
doing "once around the patch", but my conscience (developed from reading
so many "aftermath" reports) got the best of me and I decided to do the
right thing and fix it before I took off. As you read the story you
will see some reasonings that may shed light for you a bit.
I ask of all of you to treat this with the utmost respect, because there
are still living members of his family that have deep feelings.
Understanding accidents is important, and so is preservation of their
well being. So to help meet these needs, I have made this a link that
you will need to log in to read. This is made only semi-public to limit
it's distribution to only RV-10 builders.
Please do not distribute further for the time being.
With that said, please feel free to read the following synopsis, and not
use it to draw "smoking gun" conclusions. I do feel though that you
will develop somewhat of an understanding. Be aware that nobody is
immune to this sort of thought process, so it is up to you and all of us
to not become the second fatality in our RV-10 family.
Here is the link:
http://www.myrv10.com/builders/N289DT_accident.html
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rick Sked wrote:
>
> Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like
> myself have speculated privately about what happened but without
> substantiation. I hope that the cause is found and disseminated to
> everyone to prevent future tragedies. If Dan was able, he would post
> what happened during those last minutes to get the word out so the
> same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident has
> personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on
> aviation and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several
> Aviation Safety magazines. They all promote thinking and provide
> insight to staying alive and flying, but all those reports and stories
> never left a pit in my gut like this one.
>
> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "RV Builder (Michael
> Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net> To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent:
> Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
> Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>
> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary
> report on N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable
> cause, or at least haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>
> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless
> they had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight.
> I also really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information
> because of legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not
> suggesting anything, just a fact of business.
>
> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision
> making process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand knowledge
> of any bad decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer to give
> people the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but there was too
> much chatter before this to ignore. The fact is only one of two
> things caused this accident, either mechanical or pilot failures or a
> combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad decision
> in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way.
> It's that compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to
> bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people
> having a bad day.
>
> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that it
> will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a conclusion
> without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable cause. Even
> the NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a conclusion. I doubt
> there will be a single smoking gun in this accident but you never
> know. I suggest this because there are several other people out there
> looking at installing an alternative engine and we can't deny the fact
> that the install of an alternative engine in this case probably had a
> contributing factor. I think it is important for those people to have
> information available to help them with their decision making process
> on their own installs.
>
> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to
> the firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for CG
> considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of the
> size. We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the
> impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and
> no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority in a
> flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to
> accommodate the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the
> Egg FWF package is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much
> less than the standard 540 configuration once all the accessories are
> added.
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let
> this go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list I
> have had numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went
> through the process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even
> though we came to different conclusions there was always an
> understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
> respected that.
>
> Michael
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>
>
> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything in
> regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
> Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers. But,
> there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider great
> background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss at this
> time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first? On one
> hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to hear while
> the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there are people
> who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like "XYZ nut was
> removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated from airplane
> and recovered 1 mile from impact site". I'm just having problems
> coming to terms with when is the right time for us.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>
>
> gary wrote:
>>
>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do
>> we know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just
>> curious if any thing suspicious was found.
>>
>> Gary 40274 Painting
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
>
>
"Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
your computer."
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 |
|
Tim,
Very well written and gives some crucial insight to events prior to the accident.
Well done! As the hub of information for this community, I think only you
could give it the insight that you have.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
Ok folks, I've received enough encouragement offline to share the story
that I think it's time for limited distribution. You have no idea how
many people who are nearing their first flight are becoming nervous,
and how many wives of builders are starting to second-guess their
projects. This accident has touched some people pretty deeply and
there is very understandable concern that they would just like to hear
more information to give them something to understand the situation a
bit.
I warn you that you aren't going to find any smoking guns in the story,
so for those wanting that sort of thing, it's not here. But, the story
does provide numerous opportunities for observation and introspection
for the builder, to perhaps give you something to nudge you to do the
proper thing if the time ever hits you. Truly, attitudes are a critical
part of safe flying. Even on my first flight, I had the opportunity
to take off with a battery warning because I hadn't clicked in my
alternator control wire plug tight enough. I thought briefly about just
doing "once around the patch", but my conscience (developed from reading
so many "aftermath" reports) got the best of me and I decided to do the
right thing and fix it before I took off. As you read the story
you will see some reasonings that may shed light for you a bit.
I ask of all of you to treat this with the utmost respect, because there
are still living members of his family that have deep feelings.
Understanding accidents is important, and so is preservation of
their well being. So to help meet these needs, I have made this a
link that you will need to log in to read. This is made only
semi-public to limit it's distribution to only RV-10 builders.
Please do not distribute further for the time being.
With that said, please feel free to read the following synopsis, and not
use it to draw "smoking gun" conclusions. I do feel though that you
will develop somewhat of an understanding. Be aware that nobody is
immune to this sort of thought process, so it is up to you and all of
us to not become the second fatality in our RV-10 family.
Here is the link:
http://www.myrv10.com/builders/N289DT_accident.html
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rick Sked wrote:
>
> Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like
> myself have speculated privately about what happened but without
> substantiation. I hope that the cause is found and disseminated to
> everyone to prevent future tragedies. If Dan was able, he would post
> what happened during those last minutes to get the word out so the
> same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident has
> personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on
> aviation and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several
> Aviation Safety magazines. They all promote thinking and provide
> insight to staying alive and flying, but all those reports and
> stories never left a pit in my gut like this one.
>
> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "RV Builder (Michael
> Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net> To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent:
> Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
> Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>
> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary
> report on N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable
> cause, or at least haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>
> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless
> they had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight.
> I also really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information
> because of legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not
> suggesting anything, just a fact of business.
>
> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision
> making process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand
> knowledge of any bad decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer
> to give people the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but there
> was too much chatter before this to ignore. The fact is only one of
> two things caused this accident, either mechanical or pilot failures
> or a combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad
> decision in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way.
> It's that compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to
> bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people
> having a bad day.
>
> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that
> it will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a
> conclusion without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable
> cause. Even the NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a
> conclusion. I doubt there will be a single smoking gun in this
> accident but you never know. I suggest this because there are
> several other people out there looking at installing an alternative
> engine and we can't deny the fact that the install of an alternative
> engine in this case probably had a contributing factor. I think it
> is important for those people to have information available to help
> them with their decision making process on their own installs.
>
> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to
> the firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for
> CG considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of
> the size. We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the
> impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and
> no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority in a
> flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to
> accommodate the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the
> Egg FWF package is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much
> less than the standard 540 configuration once all the accessories are
> added.
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let
> this go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list
> I have had numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went
> through the process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even
> though we came to different conclusions there was always an
> understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
> respected that.
>
> Michael
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>
>
> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything
> in regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
> Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers. But,
> there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider great
> background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss at this
> time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first? On one
> hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to hear
> while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there are
> people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like "XYZ nut
> was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated from
> airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site". I'm just having
> problems coming to terms with when is the right time for us.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>
>
> gary wrote:
>>
>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but
>> do we know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation,
>> just curious if any thing suspicious was found.
>>
>> Gary 40274 Painting
>>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
>
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 |
|
The most often asked question we builders get asked is "when will it be
done". On Tuesday is the standard answer, whether this week, month, or
year. It is done when it is done, not before.
Gary
40274
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 6:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
Tim,
Congratulations - that is the most inspired piece of writing I have seen
in a long, long time. I am sure there are many of us who are becoming
frustrated with just how long it takes to complete this project and I
can imagine how easy it could become to compromise on quality and safety
to 'just get it done'. It is sad that it takes a loss to our building
family to hammer the point home.
You have done well my friend. You have convinced me to take as long as
it takes, to build to my best ability, and receive the training that I
know I need.
Regards,
Ron
187 - finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Monday, 19 November 2007 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
Ok folks, I've received enough encouragement offline to share the story
that I think it's time for limited distribution. You have no idea how
many people who are nearing their first flight are becoming nervous, and
how many wives of builders are starting to second-guess their projects.
This accident has touched some people pretty deeply and there is very
understandable concern that they would just like to hear more
information to give them something to understand the situation a bit.
I warn you that you aren't going to find any smoking guns in the story,
so for those wanting that sort of thing, it's not here. But, the story
does provide numerous opportunities for observation and introspection
for the builder, to perhaps give you something to nudge you to do the
proper thing if the time ever hits you. Truly, attitudes are a critical
part of safe flying. Even on my first flight, I had the opportunity to
take off with a battery warning because I hadn't clicked in my
alternator control wire plug tight enough. I thought briefly about just
doing "once around the patch", but my conscience (developed from reading
so many "aftermath" reports) got the best of me and I decided to do the
right thing and fix it before I took off. As you read the story you
will see some reasonings that may shed light for you a bit.
I ask of all of you to treat this with the utmost respect, because there
are still living members of his family that have deep feelings.
Understanding accidents is important, and so is preservation of their
well being. So to help meet these needs, I have made this a link that
you will need to log in to read. This is made only semi-public to limit
it's distribution to only RV-10 builders.
Please do not distribute further for the time being.
With that said, please feel free to read the following synopsis, and not
use it to draw "smoking gun" conclusions. I do feel though that you
will develop somewhat of an understanding. Be aware that nobody is
immune to this sort of thought process, so it is up to you and all of us
to not become the second fatality in our RV-10 family.
Here is the link:
http://www.myrv10.com/builders/N289DT_accident.html
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rick Sked wrote:
>
> Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like
> myself have speculated privately about what happened but without
> substantiation. I hope that the cause is found and disseminated to
> everyone to prevent future tragedies. If Dan was able, he would post
> what happened during those last minutes to get the word out so the
> same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident has
> personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on
> aviation and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several
> Aviation Safety magazines. They all promote thinking and provide
> insight to staying alive and flying, but all those reports and stories
> never left a pit in my gut like this one.
>
> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "RV Builder (Michael
> Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net> To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent:
> Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
> Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>
> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary
> report on N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable
> cause, or at least haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>
> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless
> they had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight.
> I also really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information
> because of legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not
> suggesting anything, just a fact of business.
>
> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision
> making process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand knowledge
> of any bad decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer to give
> people the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but there was too
> much chatter before this to ignore. The fact is only one of two
> things caused this accident, either mechanical or pilot failures or a
> combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad decision
> in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way.
> It's that compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to
> bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people
> having a bad day.
>
> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that it
> will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a conclusion
> without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable cause. Even
> the NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a conclusion. I doubt
> there will be a single smoking gun in this accident but you never
> know. I suggest this because there are several other people out there
> looking at installing an alternative engine and we can't deny the fact
> that the install of an alternative engine in this case probably had a
> contributing factor. I think it is important for those people to have
> information available to help them with their decision making process
> on their own installs.
>
> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to
> the firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for CG
> considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of the
> size. We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the
> impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and
> no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority in a
> flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to
> accommodate the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the
> Egg FWF package is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much
> less than the standard 540 configuration once all the accessories are
> added.
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let
> this go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list I
> have had numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went
> through the process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even
> though we came to different conclusions there was always an
> understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
> respected that.
>
> Michael
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>
>
> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything in
> regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
> Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers. But,
> there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider great
> background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss at this
> time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first? On one
> hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to hear while
> the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there are people
> who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like "XYZ nut was
> removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated from airplane
> and recovered 1 mile from impact site". I'm just having problems
> coming to terms with when is the right time for us.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>
>
> gary wrote:
>>
>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do
>> we know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just
>> curious if any thing suspicious was found.
>>
>> Gary 40274 Painting
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
>
>
"Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
your computer."
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: N289DT Accident |
Ron,
I greatly appreciate the feedback. I have very mixed feelings
as you can tell, but if you got that all out of it, then you
by all means got the intent. The actual cause of the crash is
unknown, but in all reality, you can probably see now that there
was so much more to it than some sort of mechanical happening.
It's not so much speculation, as it is relevant background information.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
McGANN, Ron wrote:
>
> Tim,
>
> Congratulations - that is the most inspired piece of writing I have seen
> in a long, long time. I am sure there are many of us who are becoming
> frustrated with just how long it takes to complete this project and I
> can imagine how easy it could become to compromise on quality and safety
> to 'just get it done'. It is sad that it takes a loss to our building
> family to hammer the point home.
>
> You have done well my friend. You have convinced me to take as long as
> it takes, to build to my best ability, and receive the training that I
> know I need.
>
> Regards,
> Ron
> 187 - finishing
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Monday, 19 November 2007 9:23 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
>
> Ok folks, I've received enough encouragement offline to share the story
> that I think it's time for limited distribution. You have no idea how
> many people who are nearing their first flight are becoming nervous, and
> how many wives of builders are starting to second-guess their projects.
> This accident has touched some people pretty deeply and there is very
> understandable concern that they would just like to hear more
> information to give them something to understand the situation a bit.
>
> I warn you that you aren't going to find any smoking guns in the story,
> so for those wanting that sort of thing, it's not here. But, the story
> does provide numerous opportunities for observation and introspection
> for the builder, to perhaps give you something to nudge you to do the
> proper thing if the time ever hits you. Truly, attitudes are a critical
> part of safe flying. Even on my first flight, I had the opportunity to
> take off with a battery warning because I hadn't clicked in my
> alternator control wire plug tight enough. I thought briefly about just
> doing "once around the patch", but my conscience (developed from reading
> so many "aftermath" reports) got the best of me and I decided to do the
> right thing and fix it before I took off. As you read the story you
> will see some reasonings that may shed light for you a bit.
>
> I ask of all of you to treat this with the utmost respect, because there
> are still living members of his family that have deep feelings.
> Understanding accidents is important, and so is preservation of their
> well being. So to help meet these needs, I have made this a link that
> you will need to log in to read. This is made only semi-public to limit
> it's distribution to only RV-10 builders.
> Please do not distribute further for the time being.
>
> With that said, please feel free to read the following synopsis, and not
> use it to draw "smoking gun" conclusions. I do feel though that you
> will develop somewhat of an understanding. Be aware that nobody is
> immune to this sort of thought process, so it is up to you and all of us
> to not become the second fatality in our RV-10 family.
>
> Here is the link:
> http://www.myrv10.com/builders/N289DT_accident.html
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Rick Sked wrote:
>>
>> Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like
>> myself have speculated privately about what happened but without
>> substantiation. I hope that the cause is found and disseminated to
>> everyone to prevent future tragedies. If Dan was able, he would post
>> what happened during those last minutes to get the word out so the
>> same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident has
>> personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on
>> aviation and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several
>> Aviation Safety magazines. They all promote thinking and provide
>> insight to staying alive and flying, but all those reports and stories
>
>> never left a pit in my gut like this one.
>>
>> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "RV Builder (Michael
>> Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net> To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent:
>> Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
>> Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>>
>> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>>
>> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
>> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
>> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary
>> report on N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable
>> cause, or at least haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>>
>> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless
>> they had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight.
>> I also really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information
>> because of legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not
>> suggesting anything, just a fact of business.
>>
>> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision
>> making process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand knowledge
>
>> of any bad decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer to give
>> people the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but there was too
>> much chatter before this to ignore. The fact is only one of two
>> things caused this accident, either mechanical or pilot failures or a
>> combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad decision
>> in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way.
>> It's that compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to
>> bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people
>> having a bad day.
>>
>> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
>> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that it
>
>> will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a conclusion
>
>> without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable cause. Even
>> the NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a conclusion. I doubt
>> there will be a single smoking gun in this accident but you never
>> know. I suggest this because there are several other people out there
>
>> looking at installing an alternative engine and we can't deny the fact
>
>> that the install of an alternative engine in this case probably had a
>> contributing factor. I think it is important for those people to have
>
>> information available to help them with their decision making process
>> on their own installs.
>>
>> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
>> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to
>> the firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for CG
>
>> considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of the
>> size. We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the
>> impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and
>> no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority in a
>> flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to
>> accommodate the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the
>> Egg FWF package is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much
>> less than the standard 540 configuration once all the accessories are
>> added.
>>
>> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let
>> this go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list I
>
>> have had numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went
>> through the process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even
>> though we came to different conclusions there was always an
>> understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
>> respected that.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
>> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>>
>>
>> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
>
>> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything in
>> regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
>> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
>> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
>> Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers. But,
>> there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider great
>> background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss at this
>> time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first? On one
>> hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to hear while
>
>> the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there are people
>> who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like "XYZ nut was
>> removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated from airplane
>
>> and recovered 1 mile from impact site". I'm just having problems
>> coming to terms with when is the right time for us.
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>>
>>
>> gary wrote:
>>>
>>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do
>
>>> we know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just
>
>>> curious if any thing suspicious was found.
>>>
>>> Gary 40274 Painting
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> "Warning:
> The information contained in this email and any attached files is
> confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
> recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
> attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
> in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
> taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
> however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
> sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
> checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
> your computer."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Certainly the list can wait for the NTSB report to take it apart but there
are several points worth mentioning that can be deduced by a check of the
public FAA records. The aircraft was DAR inspected 7/10/2007 and first flown
7/12/2007. Less than two weeks later the 40 hours of test period which are
usually restricted to the local area were flown "off" and the aircraft
arrived at OSH. This may seem a little John Cox but the reason for a test
period is "fly, analyze, fix and fly again". This does not seem to be
compatible with an aircraft display at OSH less than two weeks later.
The second point is that alternative engine installations require the same
amount of engineering analysis and design as certified ones. The builder
needs to have the engineering expertise (in which case he pays with his
time) or purchase the expertise (cash) or wing it (risk). I will not
speculate on the motives or actions of this builder but if a builder cannot
afford a Lycosaurus then he can't afford to do an alternate engine properly.
I recall when I was purchasing the tail kit that Mistral was offering me a
$5000 discount on the engine to bring an flying 10 to OSH the next year. We
just laughed, knowing the real costs. During my building partner's visit to
Switzerland he visited the factory; the engineers there indicated that they
could not fly for more than 30 minutes due to heat problems; yet the
peddlers were trying to sell an engine for me to 'engineer" into the 10.
Incidentally they are still trying to certify this engine in a long term
project with Embry Riddle. With alternative engines as it is with all of
aviation, "If you cannot afford the time and money to do it right , you
cannot afford to do it".
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
Tim, My thanks to you for the time putting this post together. I'm one
of those that is getting 'close' to flying, and Dan's crash and death
hit me personally hard. I also have experienced and share Ron's comments
about the frustration, in the never ending 'final finishing stretch'.
But if there is a silver lining to this story, it is that it has helped
at least one builder (me) to adjust their attitude about completion, I
no longer have a 'date' target, (what's the use? I never meet any of
them anyway!) Instead, I have 73 items on a Word document, and I add 1
item for every 2 that I cross off. Someday there will be no more items
on the list, and then I'll begin another called 'items found during
testing of systems prior to 1st flight'.
The NTSB has historically paid less attention to the Experimental
segment of aviation, so we may never hear/know the 'cause'. But this
post reinforces that perhaps the best tool we have as builders/pilots is
Judgement. May we all use it wisely.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
In a message dated 11/18/2007 6:34:15 PM Central Standard Time,
deemsdavis@cox.net writes:
The NTSB has historically paid less attention to the Experimental
segment of aviation, so we may never hear/know the 'cause'. But this
post reinforces that perhaps the best tool we have as builders/pilots is
Judgement. May we all use it wisely.
Deems while you feel this way about the NTSB and maybe the FAA who may
assist in the various investigation, from my research and working as a CAP Wing
Safety Officer, I can tell you that if you go to the NTSB files you'll find that
they investigate all accidents about equally...there are many Van's
accidents and incidents to read about. But not ultralight aircraft since they
are
not registered...that the key, if registered they must investigate.
When Aviation Consumer wrote an article concerning the accident rates of
experimentals, I did a secondary research of all Van's accidents and all Cirrus
accidents to compare experimentals best kit to GA best selling production
plane. Actually, Van's numbers were OK about equal to the accident rate/hrs as
Piper...far behind Cessna's and well a head of Cirrus...but at that time
Cirrus was somewhat newish and they'd had a lot of fatal accidents per hours
flown. Since that time Cirrus has gotten a new safety program and their hours
have steadily increased with better and safer flying hours.
Anyway I presented the data and my conclusions to AC, the sent a note back
saying basically Ok, Van's are good but we're talking about all experimental's
vs production aircraft. And they did not want to review the top one in each
category. I don't have my data currently, but as I remember the #1 reason
for a Van's accident was pilots running out of gas with often fatal results.
Cirrus's #1 reason...IFR flight into IMC and failure of pilot control but
hard to tell from reading NTSB reports whether a final report or from other
categories.
If you're in flying long enough, you'll lose some friends, I've lost several
this past year. But let's all do the best we can do building, flying and
supporting each other whether in a spam can or experimental.
P
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 |
|
| Subject: | Pullable 60 Amp Breaker |
Over the years I've looked without success for a pullable 60 Amp
breaker. The other day I noticed one in a friend's Glastar (an early
two-weeks-to-taxi pathfinder). I crawled under the panel, jotted down
the part number, and found several sources on the net. The part number
is 413-K14-LN2, made by ETA. I bought one from Pacific Coast Avionics
(part number "ETA-60". They have a 75 Amp version, too.
Use with caution, of course. Pulling the breaker when the alternator is
putting out significant current can ruin the alternator (V = L*di/dt, I
suppose).
--
Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA)
RV-6A N47TD -- 900 hrs
RV-10 #40059 under construction
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: N289DT Accident |
Thanks Tim,
I'll slide out from behind the wall I have been hiding and confess to a sharp lack
of confidence in myself for the last few weeks. The project has pretty much
set awhile I worked on what's important, my brain and my life. Little things
got crossed off the list but forward progress, not really. I had to force myself
to go to Aviation Nation, and that's in my backyard!! If it were not for my
good friend Bob Kaufmann tugging me along I would not have went. I would not
have had the chance to meet Wayne and see his -10 along with seeing you and your
family and Scott. I can honestly say I never had a "that's good enough attitude"
or felt a pressing need to finish. (I'm 40185, what's that tell you) And
now for sure I'm not changing my standards. Thanks for sharing the bits and
pieces of your history with Dan.
Rick Sked
40185
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 2:52:33 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: Re: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
Ok folks, I've received enough encouragement offline to share the story
that I think it's time for limited distribution. You have no idea how
many people who are nearing their first flight are becoming nervous,
and how many wives of builders are starting to second-guess their
projects. This accident has touched some people pretty deeply and
there is very understandable concern that they would just like to hear
more information to give them something to understand the situation a
bit.
I warn you that you aren't going to find any smoking guns in the story,
so for those wanting that sort of thing, it's not here. But, the story
does provide numerous opportunities for observation and introspection
for the builder, to perhaps give you something to nudge you to do the
proper thing if the time ever hits you. Truly, attitudes are a critical
part of safe flying. Even on my first flight, I had the opportunity
to take off with a battery warning because I hadn't clicked in my
alternator control wire plug tight enough. I thought briefly about just
doing "once around the patch", but my conscience (developed from reading
so many "aftermath" reports) got the best of me and I decided to do the
right thing and fix it before I took off. As you read the story
you will see some reasonings that may shed light for you a bit.
I ask of all of you to treat this with the utmost respect, because there
are still living members of his family that have deep feelings.
Understanding accidents is important, and so is preservation of
their well being. So to help meet these needs, I have made this a
link that you will need to log in to read. This is made only
semi-public to limit it's distribution to only RV-10 builders.
Please do not distribute further for the time being.
With that said, please feel free to read the following synopsis, and not
use it to draw "smoking gun" conclusions. I do feel though that you
will develop somewhat of an understanding. Be aware that nobody is
immune to this sort of thought process, so it is up to you and all of
us to not become the second fatality in our RV-10 family.
Here is the link:
http://www.myrv10.com/builders/N289DT_accident.html
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rick Sked wrote:
>
> Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like
> myself have speculated privately about what happened but without
> substantiation. I hope that the cause is found and disseminated to
> everyone to prevent future tragedies. If Dan was able, he would post
> what happened during those last minutes to get the word out so the
> same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident has
> personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on
> aviation and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several
> Aviation Safety magazines. They all promote thinking and provide
> insight to staying alive and flying, but all those reports and
> stories never left a pit in my gut like this one.
>
> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "RV Builder (Michael
> Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net> To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent:
> Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
> Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>
> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary
> report on N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable
> cause, or at least haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>
> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless
> they had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight.
> I also really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information
> because of legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not
> suggesting anything, just a fact of business.
>
> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision
> making process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand
> knowledge of any bad decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer
> to give people the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but there
> was too much chatter before this to ignore. The fact is only one of
> two things caused this accident, either mechanical or pilot failures
> or a combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad
> decision in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way.
> It's that compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to
> bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people
> having a bad day.
>
> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that
> it will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a
> conclusion without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable
> cause. Even the NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a
> conclusion. I doubt there will be a single smoking gun in this
> accident but you never know. I suggest this because there are
> several other people out there looking at installing an alternative
> engine and we can't deny the fact that the install of an alternative
> engine in this case probably had a contributing factor. I think it
> is important for those people to have information available to help
> them with their decision making process on their own installs.
>
> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to
> the firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for
> CG considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of
> the size. We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the
> impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and
> no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority in a
> flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to
> accommodate the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the
> Egg FWF package is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much
> less than the standard 540 configuration once all the accessories are
> added.
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let
> this go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list
> I have had numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went
> through the process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even
> though we came to different conclusions there was always an
> understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
> respected that.
>
> Michael
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>
>
> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything
> in regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
> Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers. But,
> there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider great
> background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss at this
> time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first? On one
> hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to hear
> while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there are
> people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like "XYZ nut
> was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated from
> airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site". I'm just having
> problems coming to terms with when is the right time for us.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>
>
> gary wrote:
>>
>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but
>> do we know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation,
>> just curious if any thing suspicious was found.
>>
>> Gary 40274 Painting
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
Fear not Mr. Sked, I plod along here at #40072, 4 years this past October, 1
to go? 1.5?
-Chris Lucas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Sked" <ricksked@embarqmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
> Thanks Tim,
>
> I'll slide out from behind the wall I have been hiding and confess to a
> sharp lack of confidence in myself for the last few weeks. The project has
> pretty much set awhile I worked on what's important, my brain and my life.
> Little things got crossed off the list but forward progress, not really. I
> had to force myself to go to Aviation Nation, and that's in my backyard!!
> If it were not for my good friend Bob Kaufmann tugging me along I would
> not have went. I would not have had the chance to meet Wayne and see
> his -10 along with seeing you and your family and Scott. I can honestly
> say I never had a "that's good enough attitude" or felt a pressing need to
> finish. (I'm 40185, what's that tell you) And now for sure I'm not
> changing my standards. Thanks for sharing the bits and pieces of your
> history with Dan.
>
> Rick Sked
> 40185
>
> do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 2:52:33 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
>
> Ok folks, I've received enough encouragement offline to share the story
> that I think it's time for limited distribution. You have no idea how
> many people who are nearing their first flight are becoming nervous,
> and how many wives of builders are starting to second-guess their
> projects. This accident has touched some people pretty deeply and
> there is very understandable concern that they would just like to hear
> more information to give them something to understand the situation a
> bit.
>
> I warn you that you aren't going to find any smoking guns in the story,
> so for those wanting that sort of thing, it's not here. But, the story
> does provide numerous opportunities for observation and introspection
> for the builder, to perhaps give you something to nudge you to do the
> proper thing if the time ever hits you. Truly, attitudes are a critical
> part of safe flying. Even on my first flight, I had the opportunity
> to take off with a battery warning because I hadn't clicked in my
> alternator control wire plug tight enough. I thought briefly about just
> doing "once around the patch", but my conscience (developed from reading
> so many "aftermath" reports) got the best of me and I decided to do the
> right thing and fix it before I took off. As you read the story
> you will see some reasonings that may shed light for you a bit.
>
> I ask of all of you to treat this with the utmost respect, because there
> are still living members of his family that have deep feelings.
> Understanding accidents is important, and so is preservation of
> their well being. So to help meet these needs, I have made this a
> link that you will need to log in to read. This is made only
> semi-public to limit it's distribution to only RV-10 builders.
> Please do not distribute further for the time being.
>
> With that said, please feel free to read the following synopsis, and not
> use it to draw "smoking gun" conclusions. I do feel though that you
> will develop somewhat of an understanding. Be aware that nobody is
> immune to this sort of thought process, so it is up to you and all of
> us to not become the second fatality in our RV-10 family.
>
> Here is the link:
> http://www.myrv10.com/builders/N289DT_accident.html
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Rick Sked wrote:
>>
>> Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like
>> myself have speculated privately about what happened but without
>> substantiation. I hope that the cause is found and disseminated to
>> everyone to prevent future tragedies. If Dan was able, he would post
>> what happened during those last minutes to get the word out so the
>> same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident has
>> personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on
>> aviation and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several
>> Aviation Safety magazines. They all promote thinking and provide
>> insight to staying alive and flying, but all those reports and
>> stories never left a pit in my gut like this one.
>>
>> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "RV Builder (Michael
>> Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net> To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent:
>> Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
>> Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>>
>> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>>
>> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
>> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
>> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary
>> report on N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable
>> cause, or at least haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>>
>> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless
>> they had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight.
>> I also really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information
>> because of legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not
>> suggesting anything, just a fact of business.
>>
>> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision
>> making process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand
>> knowledge of any bad decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer
>> to give people the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but there
>> was too much chatter before this to ignore. The fact is only one of
>> two things caused this accident, either mechanical or pilot failures
>> or a combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad
>> decision in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way.
>> It's that compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to
>> bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people
>> having a bad day.
>>
>> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
>> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that
>> it will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a
>> conclusion without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable
>> cause. Even the NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a
>> conclusion. I doubt there will be a single smoking gun in this
>> accident but you never know. I suggest this because there are
>> several other people out there looking at installing an alternative
>> engine and we can't deny the fact that the install of an alternative
>> engine in this case probably had a contributing factor. I think it
>> is important for those people to have information available to help
>> them with their decision making process on their own installs.
>>
>> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
>> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to
>> the firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for
>> CG considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of
>> the size. We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the
>> impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and
>> no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority in a
>> flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to
>> accommodate the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the
>> Egg FWF package is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much
>> less than the standard 540 configuration once all the accessories are
>> added.
>>
>> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let
>> this go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list
>> I have had numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went
>> through the process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even
>> though we came to different conclusions there was always an
>> understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
>> respected that.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
>> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>>
>>
>> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
>> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything
>> in regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
>> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
>> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty.
>> Even the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers. But,
>> there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider great
>> background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss at this
>> time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first? On one
>> hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to hear
>> while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there are
>> people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like "XYZ nut
>> was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated from
>> airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site". I'm just having
>> problems coming to terms with when is the right time for us.
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>>
>>
>> gary wrote:
>>>
>>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but
>>> do we know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation,
>>> just curious if any thing suspicious was found.
>>>
>>> Gary 40274 Painting
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
Hi Tim,
If I could get access to your site I would appreciate it. You may have me on your
roster from the past couple of years but we have had a slowdown in construction
on our "10" project.
This accident with Dan has actually inspired me to get back to it and work even
harder at building a quality, safe aircraft. Anything I can glean from the proceedings
would be beneficial. I recall talking to Dan at various times and I
unfortunately regret not meeting up with him on a trip to Dana's in Kentucky as
we planned awhile back. Now I wish I had made more effort to get together for
that event. Maybe that would have changed events in life for us both.
Thanks for your excellent documentation and logs of construction and subsequent
flying of your "10". Invaluable...
Jim Carlton
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: Tail Longeron bending |
John;
Of course I'm right, I got the original information off your website!!
speaking of which, when are you going to end the break and start the
wings??
Pascal
Wings- half way there to being half done with them
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: John Jessen
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 2:39 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
Pascal has it right. You might take a look at my pictures here:
http://www.soundingsresearch.com/RV-10/Empennage/Tailcone/Tailcone06.htm
Use a shot filled mallet. Don't be shy. Just stress it in the right
direction and whack it just in front of the vice jaws where you have it
secured using the plastic or aluminum jaw inserts. Take your time and
don't be nervous about it. It will bend.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 2:19 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
I recall putting it on a vise and hitting it with a mallet, bend
rather easily for me. I started close to the bending point and once I
had the slight bend hit it hard a couple of times a little farther out.
Pretty much followed the plans, as I recall.
If you have it positioned solidly in a vise hit it hard to get the
initial bend going, should be easy after that.
Pascal
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Leffler
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 1:26 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I
must either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
I mentioned before I read Aviation weekly and the NTSB reports circular, but
Tim, you far exceeded any report either magazine will be able to match.
There was a mention in your report that mentioned "See, I almost feel like
a father when I read that....You've got this kid that you know is doing
stupid things, and he's not going to listen to a lecture"
Once again it shows how you are a leader and really do care enough to say
what needs to be said. Truthfully anybody else giving this report would not
have held the level that it does coming from you.
Sad to read since regardless of the final NTSB report we now have .. "the
rest of the story"
Thanks Tim!
Pascal
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>
> Ok folks, I've received enough encouragement offline to share the story
> that I think it's time for limited distribution. You have no idea how
> many people who are nearing their first flight are becoming nervous,
> and how many wives of builders are starting to second-guess their
> projects. This accident has touched some people pretty deeply and
> there is very understandable concern that they would just like to hear
> more information to give them something to understand the situation a
> bit.
>
> I warn you that you aren't going to find any smoking guns in the story,
> so for those wanting that sort of thing, it's not here. But, the story
> does provide numerous opportunities for observation and introspection
> for the builder, to perhaps give you something to nudge you to do the
> proper thing if the time ever hits you. Truly, attitudes are a critical
> part of safe flying. Even on my first flight, I had the opportunity
> to take off with a battery warning because I hadn't clicked in my
> alternator control wire plug tight enough. I thought briefly about just
> doing "once around the patch", but my conscience (developed from reading
> so many "aftermath" reports) got the best of me and I decided to do the
> right thing and fix it before I took off. As you read the story
> you will see some reasonings that may shed light for you a bit.
>
> I ask of all of you to treat this with the utmost respect, because there
> are still living members of his family that have deep feelings.
> Understanding accidents is important, and so is preservation of
> their well being. So to help meet these needs, I have made this a
> link that you will need to log in to read. This is made only
> semi-public to limit it's distribution to only RV-10 builders.
> Please do not distribute further for the time being.
>
> With that said, please feel free to read the following synopsis, and not
> use it to draw "smoking gun" conclusions. I do feel though that you
> will develop somewhat of an understanding. Be aware that nobody is
> immune to this sort of thought process, so it is up to you and all of
> us to not become the second fatality in our RV-10 family.
>
> Here is the link:
> http://www.myrv10.com/builders/N289DT_accident.html
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Rick Sked wrote:
>>
>> Speculation at some point is inevitable and I'm sure many just like
>> myself have speculated privately about what happened but without
>> substantiation. I hope that the cause is found and disseminated to
>> everyone to prevent future tragedies. If Dan was able, he would post
>> what happened during those last minutes to get the word out so the
>> same fate did not befall anyone else. This whole incident has
>> personally caused me to step back and rethink my entire outlook on
>> aviation and aviation safety. I read the NTSB reports and several
>> Aviation Safety magazines. They all promote thinking and provide
>> insight to staying alive and flying, but all those reports and
>> stories never left a pit in my gut like this one.
>>
>> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "RV Builder (Michael
>> Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net> To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent:
>> Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:44:07 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
>> Subject: RV10-List: N289DT Accident
>>
>> <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
>>
>> Historically, the NTSB will release a preliminary report with it's
>> probable findings. This could be anywhere from a week to a who knows
>> when. As of yesterday they still haven't released a preliminary
>> report on N289DT which means they still haven't found a probable
>> cause, or at least haven't compiled it into a prelim report.
>>
>> I don't think anyone can take a guess at what really happened unless
>> they had firsthand knowledge to anything causal prior to the flight.
>> I also really don't expect Jan to be forthcoming with any information
>> because of legal reasons, so don't look to him for any data. Not
>> suggesting anything, just a fact of business.
>>
>> There has also been lots of back room speculation on the decision
>> making process up to that faithful day. I have no firsthand
>> knowledge of any bad decisions or shortcuts being made, and I prefer
>> to give people the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but there
>> was too much chatter before this to ignore. The fact is only one of
>> two things caused this accident, either mechanical or pilot failures
>> or a combination of both. Every single one of us has made a bad
>> decision in aviation but 99% of the time it ends in a benign way.
>> It's that compounding of small problems that can rapidly sneak up to
>> bite someone in the ass. Aviation isn't forgiving of smart people
>> having a bad day.
>>
>> So what I suggest is we start sharing what we do know and keep the
>> speculation to a minimum. It is important to remember however that
>> it will take a level of speculation and assumption to get to a
>> conclusion without a VERY clear factor to lead us to an undeniable
>> cause. Even the NTSB will make some assumptions to get to a
>> conclusion. I doubt there will be a single smoking gun in this
>> accident but you never know. I suggest this because there are
>> several other people out there looking at installing an alternative
>> engine and we can't deny the fact that the install of an alternative
>> engine in this case probably had a contributing factor. I think it
>> is important for those people to have information available to help
>> them with their decision making process on their own installs.
>>
>> Here is what we seem to know at the moment. Immediately prior to the
>> event, the batteries were relocated from the standard aft location to
>> the firewall. We know the standard battery location was chosen for
>> CG considerations. He was using two batteries but I'm not sure of
>> the size. We know the engine was running within a minute or so of the
>> impact. We know in a standard RV-10 configuration with low fuel and
>> no passengers it is possible to run out of elevator authority in a
>> flair. We also know that there were many modifications FWF to
>> accommodate the Egg engine. Does anyone know what the weight of the
>> Egg FWF package is? I thought I recall Dan telling me it wasn't much
>> less than the standard 540 configuration once all the accessories are
>> added.
>>
>> I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather let
>> this go out of respect to Dan and his family. Like many on the list
>> I have had numerous personal conversations with Dan. He and I went
>> through the process on choosing an engine at the same time. Even
>> though we came to different conclusions there was always an
>> understanding on why each of us made our decision and we both
>> respected that.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
>> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 7:49 AM To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Dan Loyd
>>
>>
>> There is a lot to be learned from Dan's experiences, but I'm not sure
>> if the group is ready to hear some of the details yet. Everything in
>> regards to the actual crash is speculation, and I doubt that other
>> than when the NTSB downloads all the EFIS/EIS data log that there is
>> any way anything 100% conclusive can ever be stated with certainty. Even
>> the logged data is just as unlikely to produce answers. But,
>> there is still a bit of information that is what I'd consider great
>> background info. The question is, is it too early to discuss at this
>> time, do we need to wait months for a full NTSB report first? On one
>> hand, it seems that some "lessons learned" may be better to hear
>> while the pain in your gut is still fresh. On the other, there are
>> people who just can't stand anything but solid evidence like "XYZ nut
>> was removed prior to flight and PQR part was found separated from
>> airplane and recovered 1 mile from impact site". I'm just having
>> problems coming to terms with when is the right time for us.
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>>
>>
>> gary wrote:
>>>
>>> I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but
>>> do we know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation,
>>> just curious if any thing suspicious was found.
>>>
>>> Gary 40274 Painting
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
>
>
Message 37
| 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 |
|
Just finished fitting the cowl; fits like a glove. Here are a couple of
tips.
the 1001N-L and -R should match the knuckles on the firewall and cowl
exactly per plan picture. Otherwise it is necessary to remove a portion of
the knuckles after the 1001Ns are riveted on. Then the center secured pin
arrangment will work.
the hinge pins on the bottom cowl hinges should be left longer and secure
with a clip at the center of the lower cowl attach bracket. Otherwise it
wil be dificult to remove the cowl pins until the exhaust cools.
the side hinge pins should be left long and bent around the forward end of
the cowl inlet and secured there (as in the Glastar). Otherwise the pin will
lack enough length to grab it and remove it..
drilling the side hinges can be accomplihed by Clecoing the forward center
together and clampling the sides together off the aircraft. This method was
used to drill the side hinges for the top cowl.
Message 38
| 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 |
|
Good tips. The one thing that would be good to inject here again
for people since it's been a long time, is that I've heard about
quite a few instances of the bottom hinges the ones next to
the exhaust for the lower cowl, breaking eyelits on the hinges
over time. One builder I know saw them brake at a pretty fast
rate, in fact. Then, they switch to a screw and nutplate
arrangement for a better lifespan. All I can think is that there's
more vibration and the lower hinges hold more of the weight
of the hanging cowl, but I do know that they've been the common
place that breaks. So, if you're on the fence about doing
nutplates and screws, use that info to your advantage. If you
want to try the hinge method on bottom, no big deal, and you can
always change those over later if you find they don't hold up.
If they do, then that's great too. As long as you monitor
them, you shouldn't really have a huge concern as there's plenty
of other hinge to hold the cowl on. I was kind of intimidated by
the hinge pin method of the cowl securing in general, but so far
I've found that even pulling the top cowl isn't a big deal
a tall, so I'm more impressed after 300+ hours than I thought I'd
be.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
David McNeill wrote:
> Just finished fitting the cowl; fits like a glove. Here are a couple of
> tips.
>
> the 1001N-L and -R should match the knuckles on the firewall and cowl
> exactly per plan picture. Otherwise it is necessary to remove a portion
> of the knuckles after the 1001Ns are riveted on. Then the center secured
> pin arrangment will work.
>
> the hinge pins on the bottom cowl hinges should be left longer and
> secure with a clip at the center of the lower cowl attach bracket.
> Otherwise it wil be dificult to remove the cowl pins until the exhaust
> cools.
>
> the side hinge pins should be left long and bent around the forward end
> of the cowl inlet and secured there (as in the Glastar). Otherwise the
> pin will lack enough length to grab it and remove it..
>
> drilling the side hinges can be accomplihed by Clecoing the forward
> center together and clampling the sides together off the aircraft. This
> method was used to drill the side hinges for the top cowl.
>
> *
>
Message 39
| 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 |
|
Most builders out here put a plate with platenuts there as it is well
documented with all RV's that the hinges may break. Simple fix now to save
dramas later.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: cowl
>
> Good tips. The one thing that would be good to inject here again
> for people since it's been a long time, is that I've heard about
> quite a few instances of the bottom hinges the ones next to
> the exhaust for the lower cowl, breaking eyelits on the hinges
> over time. One builder I know saw them brake at a pretty fast
> rate, in fact. Then, they switch to a screw and nutplate
> arrangement for a better lifespan. All I can think is that there's
> more vibration and the lower hinges hold more of the weight
> of the hanging cowl, but I do know that they've been the common
> place that breaks. So, if you're on the fence about doing
> nutplates and screws, use that info to your advantage. If you
> want to try the hinge method on bottom, no big deal, and you can
> always change those over later if you find they don't hold up.
> If they do, then that's great too. As long as you monitor
> them, you shouldn't really have a huge concern as there's plenty
> of other hinge to hold the cowl on. I was kind of intimidated by
> the hinge pin method of the cowl securing in general, but so far
> I've found that even pulling the top cowl isn't a big deal
> a tall, so I'm more impressed after 300+ hours than I thought I'd
> be.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> David McNeill wrote:
>> Just finished fitting the cowl; fits like a glove. Here are a couple of
>> tips.
>> the 1001N-L and -R should match the knuckles on the firewall and cowl
>> exactly per plan picture. Otherwise it is necessary to remove a portion
>> of the knuckles after the 1001Ns are riveted on. Then the center secured
>> pin arrangment will work.
>> the hinge pins on the bottom cowl hinges should be left longer and
>> secure with a clip at the center of the lower cowl attach bracket.
>> Otherwise it wil be dificult to remove the cowl pins until the exhaust
>> cools.
>> the side hinge pins should be left long and bent around the forward end
>> of the cowl inlet and secured there (as in the Glastar). Otherwise the
>> pin will lack enough length to grab it and remove it..
>> drilling the side hinges can be accomplihed by Clecoing the forward
>> center together and clampling the sides together off the aircraft. This
>> method was used to drill the side hinges for the top cowl. *
>>
>
>
>
Message 40
| 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: Upper gear leg fairing attach? |
I agree with Jesse. Those are sheet metal type. I didn't particularly like
the arrangement of the screws holding the fairings in place. I remember
spending a lot of time trying to figure out what were on the other side of
the skins where I was about to drill the holes. I drew the lines and
checking my dimensions. There was really no rhyme or reason I concluded how
those holes ended up being where they were. I ended up rearranging all
screws except the two aft machine screws. There's not much you can do with
those as far as rearranging them. I think there's one person I know of that
left those screws out altogether. Those machine screws go in the bottom
skin a few inches, if I remember correctly, aft of the aft spar. I think a
better way is to install nutplates vice the machine screws before you close
up the floor panels.
Anh
N591VU
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 4:33 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Upper gear leg fairing attach?
>
>
>
> Maybe "Sheet Metal Screw", the pointy kind. The screws that hold the
> upper
> intersection fairing are not machine screws. If I remember correctly, you
> just drill a hole an screw in a sheet metal screw to hold it on.
>
> Do not archive
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Johnston
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 12:03 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Upper gear leg fairing attach?
>
> hey all -
>
> perhaps a dumb question. big surprise. can someone enlighten me as to
> the
> method of attach of the upper gear leg fairing? The plans say screw #6
> 1/2
> SS SMS 3 places, and AN509-8R8 K1000-08 AN426AD3-3.5 (1place). I found
> stainless screws in the kit, but i'm thinking they're not the right ones.
> and what about nutplates for those 3 places? I don't get it. I thought
> that this must've confounded others, but a search of the archives didn't
> turn up anything. when i look inside the aircraft where these screws are
> supposed to go, it's not immediately apparent to me how it goes together.
> Are these "SMS" screws special? does "SMS" stand for "Super Magic Screw"?
>
> one additional question... does anyone think it would be a problem to do
> the
> upper gear leg intersections later, and with weight on the wheels? the
> fairings sent to me by Vans for this area more closely resemble lasagna
> noodles than fairings, and i thought i might buy new ones from Fairings
> Etc.
> The problem is, that would take more time, and I'm trying to get these
> #@$!%!! fairings done so i can hang the engine! I kind of feel like I'm
> eating all my broccoli so I can get dessert. thoughts?
>
> cj
> (currently doing fairings - so call me Sandy)
> #40410
> www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
>
>
>
Message 41
| 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 |
|
That person would be me. My bottom left hinge eyelets (there're about 6 of
them) would break one at a time, on the cowl side. I replaced the hinge on
that side and kept an eye on it to see how long it would take for the first
eyelet to break. It was something like two hours. So then I installed
nutplates in the exact locations where the rivets were holding the hinge in
place. Just on the left bottom. Six nutplates were probably excessive but I
didn't want to drill new holes in the cowl. The right hand side was fine
through all this. That is before the left side was replaced with nutplates.
So then the right side eyelets started to break. I eventually replaced the
right side with nutplates also. Have not had issues since.
Anh
N591VU
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: cowl
>
>
>
> Good tips. The one thing that would be good to inject here again
> for people since it's been a long time, is that I've heard about
> quite a few instances of the bottom hinges the ones next to
> the exhaust for the lower cowl, breaking eyelits on the hinges
> over time. One builder I know saw them brake at a pretty fast
> rate, in fact. Then, they switch to a screw and nutplate
> arrangement for a better lifespan. All I can think is that there's
> more vibration and the lower hinges hold more of the weight
> of the hanging cowl, but I do know that they've been the common
> place that breaks. So, if you're on the fence about doing
> nutplates and screws, use that info to your advantage. If you
> want to try the hinge method on bottom, no big deal, and you can
> always change those over later if you find they don't hold up.
> If they do, then that's great too. As long as you monitor
> them, you shouldn't really have a huge concern as there's plenty
> of other hinge to hold the cowl on. I was kind of intimidated by
> the hinge pin method of the cowl securing in general, but so far
> I've found that even pulling the top cowl isn't a big deal
> a tall, so I'm more impressed after 300+ hours than I thought I'd
> be.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> David McNeill wrote:
>> Just finished fitting the cowl; fits like a glove. Here are a couple of
>> tips.
>> the 1001N-L and -R should match the knuckles on the firewall and cowl
>> exactly per plan picture. Otherwise it is necessary to remove a portion
>> of the knuckles after the 1001Ns are riveted on. Then the center secured
>> pin arrangment will work.
>> the hinge pins on the bottom cowl hinges should be left longer and
>> secure with a clip at the center of the lower cowl attach bracket.
>> Otherwise it wil be dificult to remove the cowl pins until the exhaust
>> cools.
>> the side hinge pins should be left long and bent around the forward end
>> of the cowl inlet and secured there (as in the Glastar). Otherwise the
>> pin will lack enough length to grab it and remove it..
>> drilling the side hinges can be accomplihed by Clecoing the forward
>> center together and clampling the sides together off the aircraft. This
>> method was used to drill the side hinges for the top cowl. *
>>
>
>
>
Message 42
| 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: | WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes |
Hi
A few weeks ago I posted a query regarding the edge clearance on the WD-1002
brackets that tie into the F1004 fuse channel and the firewall. After some
discussion with Van's I decided to install new parts and try again.
The source of my problem seemed to be the F1001B flange that contains a line
of pre drilled holes that pretty much determined where the rivets would go
in the WD-1002 flange. Attached is a picture of the flanges that I replaced.
To my mind, and in the opinion of others I respect, these edge clearances
were insufficient. Attached is a picture of the WD1002 brackets I removed &
replaced showing the rivet edge distances I initially achieved.
Fortunately my brother who runs a heavy maintenance crew of a regonial
airline visited this weekend and help resolve my issue. We ended up
fabricating a new F1001B flange but this time without a line of rivet holes.
We then aligned all the parts (the F1001B / WD1002 and F1040 channel)
clamped everything down and drew a new rivet line on the F1001B that would
give better overall edge clearances on the WD1002 flange. The end result was
edge clearances of 1.5 - 2D on all rivets (most were 2D). This was far
better than what was originally obtained. As a side benefit I learned a
great deal about bending AL and how to avoid stress cracks in bends etc.
I guess if I had to do this all over again, I would order the F1001B without
the pre-drilled rivet holes. That way I could achieve far better results
(now that I know what to do) right out of the gate.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Still singing the section 29 blues
_____
From: Les Kearney [mailto:kearney@shaw.ca]
Sent: October-27-07 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes
Hi Again
I have a follow-up question for builders who have / are going through the
forward fuse construction. After a couple of emails / calls to Vans, it
appears that a reduced edge clearance for the to upper flange rivets is
okay. Unfortunately the edge clearances that I have achieved are still
woefully inadequate (at least to me).
I have spent quite a bit of time trying sort out what the problem is with
the WD1002. It appears that the edge of the top flange runs very close to
the line of rivet holes in the F1001B flange. As a result it requires
considerable clamping to get any sort of edge clearance when match drilling.
This clamping in turn seems to cause a distortion the firewall as it causes
a twist in the WD1002 base. I have this problem in both my WD1002 weldments.
Fortunately, the WD1003 weldments seem okay and require only a *little*
clamping to get good edge distances.
I would be interested in finding out if other builders have had the same
problem and if so how did they handle it.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse ..
Message 43
| 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: Trip report from Nellis Show |
Tim,
Curious about your flight plan to SLC from Valentine.........waypoints e
tc. Looking to go to Las Vegas in a few weeks...........what is the pr
eferred NORTH route like you took via SLC.
Dean
_____________________________________________________________
Click here to solve your love problems with the best love advice.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iiegICWW8QGZP1oBwrkdTQu
NOPldNp9mUqe5YCLSZ4JzzLGjC/
Message 44
| 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: | WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes |
Well done Les. And a tribute to my Heavy Check brethren coming to the
rescue for proper edge distance achievement. My others benefit by your
efforts.
John Cox (Formerly Heavy Check)
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 9:07 PM
Subject: FW: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet
holes
Hi
A few weeks ago I posted a query regarding the edge clearance on the
WD-1002 brackets that tie into the F1004 fuse channel and the firewall.
After some discussion with Van's I decided to install new parts and try
again.
The source of my problem seemed to be the F1001B flange that contains a
line of pre drilled holes that pretty much determined where the rivets
would go in the WD-1002 flange. Attached is a picture of the flanges
that I replaced. To my mind, and in the opinion of others I respect,
these edge clearances were insufficient. Attached is a picture of the
WD1002 brackets I removed & replaced showing the rivet edge distances I
initially achieved.
Fortunately my brother who runs a heavy maintenance crew of a regonial
airline visited this weekend and help resolve my issue. We ended up
fabricating a new F1001B flange but this time without a line of rivet
holes. We then aligned all the parts (the F1001B / WD1002 and F1040
channel) clamped everything down and drew a new rivet line on the F1001B
that would give better overall edge clearances on the WD1002 flange. The
end result was edge clearances of 1.5 - 2D on all rivets (most were 2D).
This was far better than what was originally obtained. As a side benefit
I learned a great deal about bending AL and how to avoid stress cracks
in bends etc.
I guess if I had to do this all over again, I would order the F1001B
without the pre-drilled rivet holes. That way I could achieve far better
results (now that I know what to do) right out of the gate.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Still singing the section 29 blues
________________________________
From: Les Kearney [mailto:kearney@shaw.ca]
Sent: October-27-07 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet
holes
Hi Again
I have a follow-up question for builders who have / are going through
the forward fuse construction. After a couple of emails / calls to Vans,
it appears that a reduced edge clearance for the to upper flange rivets
is okay. Unfortunately the edge clearances that I have achieved are
still woefully inadequate (at least to me).
I have spent quite a bit of time trying sort out what the problem is
with the WD1002. It appears that the edge of the top flange runs very
close to the line of rivet holes in the F1001B flange. As a result it
requires considerable clamping to get any sort of edge clearance when
match drilling. This clamping in turn seems to cause a distortion the
firewall as it causes a twist in the WD1002 base. I have this problem in
both my WD1002 weldments. Fortunately, the WD1003 weldments seem okay
and require only a *little* clamping to get good edge distances.
I would be interested in finding out if other builders have had the same
problem and if so how did they handle it.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse ..
Message 45
| 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: Trip report from Nellis Show |
That was actually pretty easy. Going to Valentine and over direct to
SLC (BTF) was pretty easy. The hard part was just going over
the mountain right at BTF. Just call approach as you get there
because there's no good way other than over the mountain in just the
right spot to do it without busting airspace. From SLC, it was a
very easy flight down to Bryce Canyon VOR, and then basically
direct Vegas. You'll fly down parallel to mountain ranges, so
you're right next to long lines of mountains, but you're scooting
along at comfortable altitudes (we used 10,500) and there isn't
anything big to get in your way. Really easy actually, although
had I just done it alone without knowing the land I probably
would have been paranoid a bit....not out of knowing I was in
mountains, but out of not knowing how simple that flight could
be.
I went KLUM to KVTN to Guernsey for a kiddie poop break, and then
direct BTF.
That North route is an hour shorter than the south for me, or more.
I couldn't do it on the way home because of a storm.
Tim
ddddsp1@juno.com wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Curious about your flight plan to SLC from Valentine.........waypoints
> etc. Looking to go to Las Vegas in a few weeks...........what is the
> preferred NORTH route like you took via SLC.
>
> Dean
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Click here to solve your love problems with the best love advice.
> <http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2112/fc/Ioyw6iiegICWW8QGZP1oBwrkdTQuNOPldNp9mUqe5YCLSZ4JzzLGjC/>
>
> *
>
>
> *
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! --
|