X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from m15.nyc.untd.com ([64.136.22.78] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with SMTP id 952432 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 21 May 2005 21:55:01 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.136.22.78; envelope-from=jbker@juno.com Received: from m15.nyc.untd.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by m15.nyc.untd.com with SMTP id AABBJ93UCAMQZJLJ for (sender ); Sat, 21 May 2005 18:54:10 -0700 (PDT) X-UNTD-OriginStamp: Y+Mfppm2QyGfnY/dq+iW1Scsk2uysiqnxBE14YiHYysejDq7HvWEUQ== Received: (from jbker@juno.com) by m15.nyc.untd.com (jqueuemail) id KTKQRTJY; Sat, 21 May 2005 18:53:55 PDT To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 20:53:56 -0400 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Crash investigation Message-ID: <20050521.215215.304.27.JBKER@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=--__JNP_000_7e9a.1d81.57a5 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 8-6,7-8,12-13,17,21-24,32-33,35-36,38-32767 From: WALTER B KERR X-ContentStamp: 11:5:1339811823 X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 127.0.0.1|localhost|m15.nyc.untd.com|jbker@juno.com This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ----__JNP_000_7e9a.1d81.57a5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit David S wrote: 2) Almost certainly, the engine has been disassembled, and the components removed. Looking for things such as seal/rotor interfaces, tolerances and wear indicators may not be able to be reliably determined any longer unless EACH part remained indexed to EACH identifiable location. 3) I would expect that the ECU has been removed and sent to the manufacturer to have it's programming at the time of the accident retrieved. I am unaware of Paul having data-logging, but if it was available, that memory likewise would have been sent out for analysis. 4) I would expect (maybe expecting too much) that the removal and disassembly had been videotaped for later review and analysis but in our current state of organization we likely to never see it without the explicit consent of the next of kin. ---------------------------------------------- I was a party to an investigation of an S-51 fatal accident that was powered by a big block chevy. The NTSB participants were totally inept (sp) at analysing anything in alternate engine in detail. The engine was not torn down period. I believe the engine was not making power at impact based on walking the site and looking at the blades, but their final report said it was running based on one witness. Several other witnesses said it had stopped running before impact! They only talked to one and wrote their report. It would certainly surprise me if they spent more than a half day total looking at the wreckage! Bernie, looking forward to Slobvovia. If PL is there, I'd bet he will talk even though he may not publish anything until after their report. ----__JNP_000_7e9a.1d81.57a5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

David S wrote:

2) Almost certainly, the engine has been disassembled, and the = components=20 removed. Looking for things such as seal/rotor interfaces, tolerances and = wear=20 indicators may not be able to be reliably determined any longer unless EACH= part=20 remained indexed to EACH identifiable location.

3) I would expect = that=20 the ECU has been removed and sent to the manufacturer to have it's = programming=20 at the time of the accident retrieved. I am unaware of Paul having data-= logging,=20 but if it was available, that memory likewise would have been sent out for= =20 analysis.
4) I would expect (maybe expecting too much) that the removal= and=20 disassembly had been videotaped for later review and analysis but in our = current=20 state of organization we likely to never see it without the explicit = consent of=20 the next of kin.

----------------------------------------------

I was a party to an investigation of an S-51 fatal accident that was=20 powered by a big block chevy. The NTSB participants were totally inept (sp)= at=20 analysing anything in alternate engine in detail. The engine was not torn = down=20 period. I believe the engine was not making power at impact based on = walking the=20 site and looking at the blades, but their final report said it was = running=20 based on one witness. Several other witnesses said it had stopped running = before=20 impact! They only talked to one and wrote their report.

It would certainly surprise me if they spent more than a half day = total=20 looking at the wreckage!

Bernie, looking forward to Slobvovia. If PL is there, I'd bet he will = talk=20 even though he may not publish anything until after their=20 report.

----__JNP_000_7e9a.1d81.57a5--