Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.233.184.205; envelope-from=hansconser@gmail.com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer;
        b=WX7egVW5ms1pIAwn3wxjRwA0kUR7XV0fTLkxLEUsRoDvoO0u18177UZgzxIzS22mTV8JHE3CoXXa1w6DQQtwtdEBSRFM+q0RSuFgSya0H0j2sImby94T2/BDunTbtDRo0eRpyEc8KQoKfGxBgZhUzkKdZJVnsDAJCGdtviOFAmw=
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623)
In-Reply-To: <list-862908@logan.com>
References: <list-862908@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <7b5de543789ddcd7ea55aa24e1939978@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Hans Conser <hansconser@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Intersting flight
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 12:55:22 -0700
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>


On Dec 4, 2005, at 11:56 AM, al p wick wrote:

> Nice of you to share the information Steve. That represents the best
> opportunity for other conversions to be successful. Glad it worked out 
> as
> well as it did.
> There are all these patterns to failures. I've found it's important to
> understand the patterns. Other pilots will read your report, feel
> uncomfortable, decide they need to........... but gradually this
> discomfort will fade. And they still haven't taken the action they need
> to take. So it's important to write down your action list. If you write
> it down in 12" high letters and post at your work station, you greatly
> increase your chances of taking action...because you've increased 
> social
> pressure.
>
> We had a crash just two months ago with exact same root cause. 
> Electrical
> failure causes loss of power. Keith too crashed for same reason 2 years
> ago. Our installations are at much higher risk than Lyc because we are
> power dependant. So we need to be most thorough in this area.
>
> So let's consider the "other" causes.
> 1) All crashes are the result of change. So when you were improving 
> your
> wiring, that change opened you up to new potential failures. So any 
> time
> we work on the plane, we take a minute before we close it up to seek 
> the
> inadvertent change. We look around, wiggle things, try to find our
> oversight.
> 2) Why don't auto's have this same failure? I noticed on my engine they
> have multiple sources for ground. Something like 5 attach points. Two
> power sources to ecm. They have all wires in looms, so you can't strain
> one wire. Looms have anchors, so you can't strain the looms. So there 
> is
> great value in understanding why other installs are successful. We 
> seldom
> notice stuff like this.
> 3) We go brain dead in emergencies. We focus better in some ways, but
> lose stuff too. It's pretty interesting. So practicing failure is
> valuable. I've found even more effective is using  graphics, audible
> warnings, computer monitoring. So, the computer would have found that
> first 10 ms power blip when you fired up the plane. Perhaps not.
>
> Off soap box. Thanks for sharing info. I've added "review ignition
> wiring" to my list.
>
>
>
> -al wick
>

Good stuff Al.  one thing I would add is that the more reliable cars 
run individual ground wires to every pint where positive power is used. 
  Honda is the brand I'm thinking of.  Unlike say Mazda, every little 
light is grounded to the chassis and with a little ground wire that 
comes out of the loom along with positive power.  Result:  Fewer ground 
fault failures.

Hans