Received-SPF: softfail
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=171.68.10.87; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <4291DE5A.1020209@nc.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 09:44:58 -0400
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Technical Advisor
References: <list-960360@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-960360@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jerry Hey wrote:

>  I realize I am the only voice that is not enthusiastic about the 
> formation of the safety police. Jerry
>

You're not alone in that concern, Jerry.  But I believe we can avoid  
the role of 'safety police'.  It is very much a matter of attitude.

George has a good point.  It will be very difficult to come into a 
builder's shop a few days before a first flight and have any expectation 
that he will give any credence to a list of safety items.  Just think, 
the guy has probably spent YEARS mulling over the position of every 
little ancillary bit, and here you come at the last second and tell him 
it's all wrong! (Even if it is just one piece, he'll feel like you're 
saying it's all wrong.)  As Ed has stated, final inspection is NOT the 
time to get involved.  At that point you're a hurdle, an obstacle to 
overcome before the builder can slip the surly bonds.

The time for involvement is while the builder is still mulling.  There 
must be a dozen major changes that I've made from information I've 
learned here.  Case in point, I'm re-installing the oil metering pump 
(but with only two of the oil injectors), and will plan on running a 
reduced amount of 2-cycle based on Lynn's advice.  The decision was easy 
to make, because I haven't built up an entire system that would exclude 
it.  For a while, I was planning on installing radiators in the rear of 
the aircraft.  Then I did a 180 and decided to move them up front like 
everyone else.  Steve Brooks came over to look at my project and we 
talked about it.  Now I'm planning on radiators at the rear again, and a 
whole slew of issues are simpler because of that decision.

In fact, my engine installation has been basically static for several 
months.  But I bought an 13B last week and stripped it for parts, so 
that a  lot of progress is being made really fast.  If there are any 
willing souls, I'd like to volunteer to be the guinea pig and explore 
the format and methodology of how 'inspections' would work.  How will 
information be presented (verbal, written report, ???) to the builder?   
How will the results be fed back to the organization (will the results 
be fed back to the organization)? It's not hard to forsee the inspectors 
having concerns about an novel technique, but the builder either finds 
it excellent in practice or it's a dud like the inspectors say.  How 
will the concerns and results be archived.

I also think the group needs a motto to keep attitudes in check.  
Something to keep people from thinking they ever have police powers.  
Something to be stated before and after an inspection, just to set the 
mood and make the purpose clear to everyone.  I propose:

"What ya' gonna' do now?"

-- 
         ,|"|"|,                                    |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===----        Dyke Delta         |
        o|  d  |o          www.ernest.isa-geek.org  |