 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 2:20 pm Post subject: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings |
 |
|
Jeff,
As I see it, the website shows fatal accidents, not accidents, i.e. the row Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes is left vacant, whereas row Fatal Crashes is filled in with the numbers you say decrease (18%) since 1994. If we assume that the number of vehicles have increased since 1994, it is safe to also assume the number of accidents have increased, but the website statistics show the number of fatal accidents decreased. This means if the assumptions are correct, safety features like what are stated below have indeed saved lives and possibly decreased the severity of non-fatal injuries. I know I feel safer with modern seat belts, air bags (the car kind, not the passenger kind), crumble zones, 4-wheel disc brakes with ABS, etc. Perhaps better designed and maintained roads is also a factor. I wonder how texting and looking at smartphones have affected injuries and fatalities?
Henador Titzoff
--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 12/7/13, Jeff Luckey <jluckey(at)pacbell.net> wrote:
Subject: Re: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings
To: "aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com" <aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com>
Date: Saturday, December 7, 2013, 1:22 PM
Jan,
I'm
not sure if you are being serious in this quote (perhaps you
were being facetious?):The
general thought of car safety is to
add more things .. seat belts – airbags – crumble zones
etc etc..
list goes on and on …
The
net results is that we tend to drive
faster .. We have more accidents .. maybe less people would
die .. but then
compared to what ?
If
you are suggesting that technology has not made cars safer,
that would be an inaccurate assertion. The advances in
motor vehicle safety that you cite have increased safety
tremendously. See:
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
Accident
rates have plummeted over the past 20 years despite large
increases in the number of vehicles. Automotive safety
is fantastic example of making things safer by applying
technology.
...
From: jan
<jan(at)claver.demon.co.uk>
To:
aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent:
Saturday, December 7, 2013 3:22 AM
Subject: RE:
Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings
Hi
Jeff,
Interesting
story. My take on this
is simply a question of ‘risk management’. Lets say that
ALL planes
that do not have this ‘extra fuse’ now suddenly get this
‘extra
fuse’ .. do you think the risk is higher that something
goes wrong with
the fuse .. the extra connectors to fit the fuse .. how the
fuse is fitted ..
how it is potentially fitted incorrectly
etc…
IF ..
the only case of ‘something
bad happened because this wire is not fused’ is the
incident that you mention
below .. Well … what do you think is more likely to happen
….
Something
wrong will all the 1000 of
planes that now have ‘one more part that can go wrong’
i.e. the
extra fuse … or a pen or something else lodging
against the bus and
shorting to ground ?
On
YOUR plane … how easy is it for
anything to actually lodge in the same place ? Suggest
looking at best
way to prevent something to lodge and short .. than to add
something that has
never been seen a ‘required’ before
….
I
agree that there are very few things
that are absolutely right or absolutely wrong .. (apart from
when at school 
…then everything was always very black and white
..
The
more you can ‘remove from the
plane’ the less you have that can go wrong … what you
are ‘left
with’ …well .. you just need to analyze the risk and
what happens
when it fail .. can you reduce the risk … without adding
another risk ..
The
following is not related to aircrafts
.. but I like to use it to make people thing about risk ..
and how to reduce accidents
…. I have no idea if it would work .. but you could
argue the case
..
The
general thought of car safety is to
add more things .. seat belts – airbags – crumble zones
etc etc..
list goes on and on …
The
net results is that we tend to drive
faster .. We have more accidents .. maybe less people would
die .. but then
compared to what ?
Here
is my idea for the ultimate car
safety device .. You remove seat belts and you make it a
legal requirement that
ALL steering wheels must have a 6” spike mounted in the
centre ..
pointing straight at your chest .. (and NO .. you can not
wear a bullet proof
west J
..)
Now
you know … if you do not drive
very carefully, no hard braking etc… … you are not going
to last
very long are you ? Looking at that 6” spike at the
steering wheel.
Sure
some people will die ..and some people
who are driving very carefully will be hit by someone who
does not …
But will the OVERALL number of accidents go up or go down
??
J
Enjoy
the weekend ! I
Jan
PS :
will not be fitting a fuse on that
wire … But I will look very very closely at how it
is run …..
From:
owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]
On Behalf Of
Jeff
Luckey
Sent: 07
December 2013 01:38
To:
aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re:
AeroElectric-List:
Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings
Bob,
Ok, I don't disagree w/ any of the points made but
let's play the Devil's
Advocate/Worst Case Scenario game.
Several years ago in Germany Pilot A was flying an Extra 300
and he looses his
pen. He finishes his flight but forgets to recover the
pen. A few
days later Pilot B takes the plane through several aerobatic
maneuvers which
dislodge the pen from where it was hiding and wedge it
between the buss on the
back of the breakers and the airframe causing a fault to
ground. Smoke in
the cockpit, panic, denial, etc but eventually Pilot B does
the right thing and
kills the master, lands plane, changes underwear, semi-happy
ending. Good
News: engine not electrically-dependent so engine keeps
running:)
Bad News: The plane requires some serious re-wire because
the feeder melted
other wires in the loom. Sure, no one died but I
certainly don't want to
be Pilot B! If that feeder had been fused there would
have been no smoke
and no damage to wiring.
The
point is that simply installing the feeder w/ care &
craftsmanship may not
be enough. No matter how well that feeder was
installed, it would have
made no difference in this scenario. Unforeseen
circumstances could make
for a bad day for your electrical system. It may be
impossible to foresee
all possible bad scenarios so we want the design of the
system to be as fault
tolerant as possible.
Perhaps
putting a fuse in the feed line may be a "belt &
suspenders"
approach but I still don't see a real down side and,
like I mentioned earlier,
I sure don't want to be Pilot B.
BTW
Bob (and all) I certainly enjoy being able to
explore & discuss these issues in cordial &
intelligent ways - whether
or not there's a right or wrong answer, I always learn
something.
-Jeff
From:
"Robert L.
Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
To:
aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday,
December 6, 2013
10:29 AM
Subject: Re:
AeroElectric-List:
Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings
Nuckolls, III"
<nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>
>
> That particular wire between battery feeders and
distribution busses has
existed in perhaps a quarter million production aircraft
over the past 80+
years and to my knowledge, has never been fitted with such
protection.
>
> I find that fascinating...
>
> In my relatively simple mind I consider adding a fuse
to the feeder
> in question to have little or no down side and
potentially huge
> upside - preventing an in-flight fire. (not a fan of
in-flight fires)
Consider the consequences of opening that fuse
(or any other event causing that pathway to open)
in a TC aircraft. You loose EVERYTHING on the panel.
I.e. single point of failure for all accessories.
Yeah but . . . if the fuse opens, then there was
something 'wrong'.
Yes, but what? The FEMA process calls for
hypothesizing
every kind of event that can open the fuse and either
(1)
crafting a plan-b or (2) suppressing the risk.
> So the downside is that there could be some innocuous
event
> that I am unaware of which pops the proposed big fuse
> unnecessarily. (sounds a little ridiculous, but
carry on...)
> I can't think of anything like that but I'm not
a genius so I
> thought I'd throw it out to The List to see if its
collective
> wisdom knows about something I may have overlooked.
We have a huge data base from which to conduct that
assessment not the least of which are big bunches of
airplanes smaller bunches of qualification studies
and relatively tiny bunches of incidences that bent
aluminum and maybe even broke bones.
The NTSB narrative on aircraft accidents is
accessible
here . . .
http://tinyurl.com/pqcdj4h
Do a random search of FINAL REPORTS with your senses
attuned to causation with roots in human failings
(either in operation, maintenance or design) and
those
which have causation in some physical failure
mechanism.
Instances that speak to any electrical will fall
into
the second category for causation and will be a
minuscule portion of the whole . . . and
of those, faulting of a wire to ground is even
smaller.
In 40 years of flying, 1000+ hrs as pilot and
probably another 2000 as passenger/observer,
I've
observed only two incidences of a popped breaker in
flight. NEITHER of those cases had root cause in a
wire faulted to ground - the fault needed to open
your proposed fuse.
The foundation for moving circuit protection off
the panel and reverting back to fuses is predicated
on similar experiences by thousands of other pilots.
Experiences suggesting that dedicating dollars,
panel
space, weight and fabrication time to a
breaker-panel
is not a good return on investment.
Bottom line is that you're many, many times more
likely to have a bad day in the cockpit for reasons
far removed from a hard ground fault on your 6AWG
bus feeder . . . and THAT because you didn't
conduct
due diligence in its installation.
Same thing applies to torque on your prop bolts,
replacing a tire that's flopping cordage, taking
an extra close look at forecasts during icing
season,
and a host of things we do that go to reducing
risk.
In the case of the bus feeder, the risks are not
so much to the wire as to the thing the wire
touches.
Case in point: C90 on short final experiences
disconnect
of elevator cables. Pilot uses trim commands and
power to
execute go-around, assesses the condition and
successfully
lands the airplane with rudder, trim and power.
Pulling up floorboards in the cockpit revealed a 40A
protected feeder to the windshield de-ice inverter
had been mis-positioned against the elevator control
cable during a maintenance operation. Over what had
to
be many hours of operation, motion of the cable wore
through the insulation bringing the cable into
contact
with the hot wire. The arcing and sparking was of
insufficient intensity to come to attention of crew
in spite of the fact that it was going on virtually
under their feet.
The copper wire was barely damaged. The breaker
never
popped while the elevator cable eventually eroded
through
and parted. Compare thermal properties of
copper versus
steel . . . this explains why the best steel safes
have
intermediate layers of copper in their construction.
It's
EASY to burn through steel . . . next to impossible
on copper.
This narrative explains the high order probability
that
even if you DID get your 6AWG feeder faulted to
ground, it's most likely to be a soft fault that
burns a hole in your airplane while doing little
damage to the wire . . . and certainly far short of
getting it to smoke and/or open a fuse/breaker.
Adding 'protection' to this pathway doubles
the
number of joints in the pathway and adds nothing
demonstrable in terms of fault response . . . which
is why the spam-can builders don't do it either.
Bob . . .
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-Lista
href="http://forums.matronics.com/"
target="_blank">http://forums.mat====================
www.aeroelectric.comwww.buildersbooks.comwww.homebuilthelp.comwww.mypilotstore.comwww.mrrace.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contributionhttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
www.homebui= * Race Consulting http://www.matronics.com/cont-========================ank"
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://wt;
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
email(at)jaredyates.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:27 pm Post subject: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings |
|
|
There is an interesting psychological factor that I've heard called "risk compensation" that applies here. For example, when football players have slightly better helmets, they feel less vulnerable, and thus hit harder. The net result is an increase in head trauma. It's sort of like having an airplane with an emergency parachute. Would you ever find yourself more likely to take a weather or mechanical risk if you knew, that if all else failed, you could pull a lever and float relatively safely to the ground? Experience shows that the human brain is wired in such a way that we can easily fall into that trap, so it's something that all aviators should be aware of. The FAA sort of addressed it in a very old training video about a new Bonanza owner who keeps saying that his plane "has enough power to take him anywhere." At the risk of spoiling the ending for those who haven't seen the video, it turns out that he was wrong.
On Dec 7, 2013, at 17:30, jan <jan(at)claver.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[quote] Jeff,
J
Of course I rather have a crash in a car that has seat belts (as I always wear them ....)
My point is that we add technical things ... to ‘protect us’ ... We could be equally safe if we took responsibility and drove in such a way that we did not have accidents – or at least had a lot less .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:29 am Post subject: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings |
|
|
At 06:28 PM 12/7/2013, you wrote:
| Quote: | | There is an interesting psychological factor that I've heard called "risk compensation" that applies here. |
Yes . . . and there are documented examples of this
phenomenon that goes back to the beginnings of
recorded history. I remember discussions at Cessna
wayyyyy back when that centered on pilot attitudes
toward risk of icing after they had boots and heated
windshield patches installed on their airplanes.
The ability to mitigate a risk can have a down-side
for making one less considerate of the risk. The
same things are happening in the cockpit when
modern electronics 'replaces' abilities to dead-reckon,
contact-navigate with maps, etc.
It's easy to forget that the only thing standing
between a pilot and a need to resurrect and practice
such skills is a pin pushed back in a connector
or a poorly crimped terminal.
Bob . . . [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rickofudall
Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 7:55 am Post subject: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings |
|
|
Jeff, I'm pretty sure that as you look to more and more outliers in order to find a problem to which you can fit your solution that it's just getting silly. Put the damn fuse in your feeder wire, feel smug, and PLEASE move on. The amount of bandwidth being devoted to this (not to mention uselessly tied up storage on Matt's servers) is absolutely ridiculous. And guys, the phrase "do not archive" below your signature will go a long way toward reducing the clutter.
Rick Girard
do not archive
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | At 06:28 PM 12/7/2013, you wrote:
| Quote: | | There is an interesting psychological factor that I've heard called "risk compensation" that applies here. |
Yes . . . and there are documented examples of this
phenomenon that goes back to the beginnings of
recorded history. I remember discussions at Cessna
wayyyyy back when that centered on pilot attitudes
toward risk of icing after they had boots and heated
windshield patches installed on their airplanes.
The ability to mitigate a risk can have a down-side
for making one less considerate of the risk. The
same things are happening in the cockpit when
modern electronics 'replaces' abilities to dead-reckon,
contact-navigate with maps, etc.
It's easy to forget that the only thing standing
between a pilot and a need to resurrect and practice
such skills is a pin pushed back in a connector
or a poorly crimped terminal.
Bob . . . | Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
ank">www.mrrace.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
|
|
--
Zulu Delta
Mk IIIC
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.
- Groucho Marx
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:21 am Post subject: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings |
|
|
At 09:54 AM 12/8/2013, you wrote:
| Quote: | Jeff, I'm pretty sure that as you look to more and more outliers in order to find a problem to which you can fit your solution that it's just getting silly. Put the damn fuse in your feeder wire, feel smug, and PLEASE move on. The amount of bandwidth being devoted to this (not to mention uselessly tied up storage on Matt's servers) is absolutely ridiculous.
And guys, the phrase "do not archive" below your signature will go a long way toward reducing the clutter.
Rick Girard
do not archive |
Richard, I think Jeff was exploiting an opportunity
to participate in the FMEA exercise. Whether or not
a fuse goes in the bus feeder for his airplane isn't
the issue. Its about how he (an others on this List)
massage available data and come to a decision.
Ultimately, its a decision only he will live with
and even then, the risks for failing to optimize
his decision are very low . . . very few airplanes
that came to an unhappy circumstance did so because
of a main bus disconnect.
While we do offer many plug-n-play answers to
questions, we are not building plug-n-play
airplanes. Those willing and able to go beyond
the cookbook solutions will benefit from having
observed or participated in this exercise.
Bob . . . [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jluckey(at)pacbell.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 4:29 pm Post subject: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings |
|
|
Rick,
Normally I wouldn't waste my time to respond to such an unenlightened post but you are way out of line here.
If you are unable to understand the engineering nuances being discussed in this thread then I suggest you just delete or ignore them. Or maybe you should read them, you might learn something.
And please take your own advice
"The amount of bandwidth being devoted to this (not to mention uselessly tied up storage on Matt's servers) is absolutely ridiculous. "
and spare The List your reply to this message - as that would certainly be a waste of
bandwidth. The members certainly don't want to watch you and me exchange barbs.
I just added your email address to my spam filter so I will never see them.
Now I feel smug
do not archive
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com>
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 8, 2013 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings
Jeff, I'm pretty sure that as you look to more and more outliers in order to find a problem to which you can fit your solution that it's just getting silly. Put the damn fuse in your feeder wire, feel smug, and PLEASE move on. The amount of bandwidth being devoted to this (not to mention uselessly tied up storage on Matt's servers) is absolutely ridiculous. And guys, the phrase "do not archive" below your signature will go a long way toward reducing the clutter.
Rick Girard
do not archive
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | At 06:28 PM 12/7/2013, you wrote:
| Quote: | | There is an interesting psychological factor that I've heard called "risk compensation" that applies here. |
Yes . . . and there are documented examples of this
phenomenon that goes back to the beginnings of
recorded history. I remember discussions at Cessna
wayyyyy back when that centered on pilot attitudes
toward risk of icing after they had boots and heated
windshield patches installed on their airplanes.
The ability to mitigate a risk can have a down-side
for making one less considerate of the risk. The
same things are happening in the cockpit when
modern electronics 'replaces' abilities to dead-reckon,
contact-navigate with maps, etc.
It's easy to forget that the only thing standing
between a pilot and a need to resurrect and practice
such skills is a pin pushed back in a connector
or a poorly crimped terminal.
Bob . . .
| Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
ank">www.mrrace.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
|
|
--
Zulu Delta
Mk IIIC
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.
- Groucho Marx
[quote]www.mypil================
[b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rickofudall
Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:14 am Post subject: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings |
|
|
Bob, I think I understand the exercise, but I don't understand the solution in search of a problem. As I learned it the decision tree looks like this;
1. Is there a problem?
2. How big is the problem?
3. Is there a need to craft a solution to the problem?
4. What is the payback, in terms of increased safety, of the solution?
In this case, it seems to me, the answer to 1. is no. Where does this decision tree go from there?
If the only instance of a problem is caused by a loose object in the cockpit, is not training or even a cockpit placard to "secure all loose items before aerobatic flight" a better solution than a feeder line fuse?
Rick
do not archive
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Jeff Luckey <jluckey(at)pacbell.net (jluckey(at)pacbell.net)> wrote:
| Quote: |
Rick,
Normally I wouldn't waste my time to respond to such an unenlightened post but you are way out of line here.
If you are unable to understand the engineering nuances being discussed in this thread then I suggest you just delete or ignore them. Or maybe you should read them, you might learn something.
And please take your own advice
"The amount of bandwidth being devoted to this (not to mention uselessly tied up storage on Matt's servers) is absolutely ridiculous. "
and spare The List your reply to this message - as that would certainly be a waste of
bandwidth. The members certainly don't want to watch you and me exchange barbs.
I just added your email address to my spam filter so I will never see them.
Now I feel smug
do not archive
From: Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com (aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com)>
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com (aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Sunday, December 8, 2013 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings
Jeff, I'm pretty sure that as you look to more and more outliers in order to find a problem to which you can fit your solution that it's just getting silly. Put the damn fuse in your feeder wire, feel smug, and PLEASE move on. The amount of bandwidth being devoted to this (not to mention uselessly tied up storage on Matt's servers) is absolutely ridiculous. And guys, the phrase "do not archive" below your signature will go a long way toward reducing the clutter.
Rick Girard
do not archive
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | At 06:28 PM 12/7/2013, you wrote:
| Quote: | | There is an interesting psychological factor that I've heard called "risk compensation" that applies here. |
Yes . . . and there are documented examples of this
phenomenon that goes back to the beginnings of
recorded history. I remember discussions at Cessna
wayyyyy back when that centered on pilot attitudes
toward risk of icing after they had boots and heated
windshield patches installed on their airplanes.
The ability to mitigate a risk can have a down-side
for making one less considerate of the risk. The
same things are happening in the cockpit when
modern electronics 'replaces' abilities to dead-reckon,
contact-navigate with maps, etc.
It's easy to forget that the only thing standing
between a pilot and a need to resurrect and practice
such skills is a pin pushed back in a connector
or a poorly crimped terminal.
Bob . . .
|
--
Zulu Delta
Mk IIIC
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.
- Groucho Marx
| Quote: | www.mypil================
|
| Quote: |
_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
="_blank">www.mypilotstore.com
ank">www.mrrace.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
|
|
--
Zulu Delta
Mk IIIC
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.
- Groucho Marx
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:51 am Post subject: Unprotected Feeder in Z Drawings |
|
|
At 10:13 AM 12/9/2013, you wrote:
| Quote: | Bob, I think I understand the exercise, but I don't understand the
solution in search of a problem. As I learned it the decision tree
looks like this;
1. Is there a problem?
2. How big is the problem?
3. Is there a need to craft a solution to the problem?
4. What is the payback, in terms of increased safety, of the solution?
In this case, it seems to me, the answer to 1. is no. Where does
this decision tree go from there?
If the only instance of a problem is caused by a loose object in the
cockpit, is not training or even a cockpit placard to "secure all
loose items before aerobatic flight" a better solution than a feeder line fuse?
|
The FMEA is not looking for a solution to a problem,
it's a sifting of simple-ideas looking for potential
elevations of risk.
The sifting of anecdotes is also a valuable exercise.
The potential for increased risk from loose, conductive items
was offered. I shared some simple-ideas about the
nature of high-quality joining of wires that gave
pause for considering the integrity of the story.
This is all about the science and forensics . . .
from which decisions might flow that solves
a "problem".
You're right, we've yet to identify a problem.
But the tools being exercised here have broad
applicability and should be practiced whether
or not a problem emerges that begs a solution.
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
