X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from m12.lax.untd.com ([64.136.30.75] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with SMTP id 984219 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 03 Jun 2005 23:12:56 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.136.30.75; envelope-from=alwick@juno.com Received: from m12.lax.untd.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by m12.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABBLCG9KAV36LWJ for (sender ); Fri, 3 Jun 2005 20:11:37 -0700 (PDT) X-UNTD-OriginStamp: L941HVjjYzDhN3itp//mkFmkn11r2XXeEPvU/nBseUq7XnQTcoXvQQ== Received: (from alwick@juno.com) by m12.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id KUMCCZRJ; Fri, 03 Jun 2005 20:11:23 PDT To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 20:10:01 -0700 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Rotary risks Message-ID: <20050603.201111.1276.24.alwick@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 2-3,8-9,12-107 From: al p wick X-ContentStamp: 40:20:1598323474 X-MAIL-INFO:22c5c5648455fd9dcd851064e410c9b4d1d4d510503d70918450d5d450e0506df4d999a5c514643464d084c4c92119c49d5580d920ed1154354531352095c1951969612d3159f0812d6925c02545b0f0b12595999934a5d434d5d4c5d06d6d55258d1131a9455470b5b579e191c185243d1451f924d5343401f9d1cd44f4b950b965c9612d15b1b104212db12d11406d2960e0009d80fd4de905ade9053505d974 X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 127.0.0.1|localhost|m12.lax.untd.com|alwick@juno.com Thanks Bob. As a courtesy, I made a point of not reading any previous posts. So you're as innocent as can be. My post wasn't well written, not a lot of facts, and very contrary. So nothing wrong with jumping on it. So I still haven't made it thru the old newsletters, but I found a section I was so impressed with. Tracy had some electrical problem, then next thing he's reviewing a number of the original design assumptions. That is what it's about. He didn't just treat the one issue, he asked the question "What else in the system has assumptions". I was most impressed. When you guys review the past incidents, are you able to find multiple causes? Are you able find how it applies to your plane, or tend to think "That doesn't apply to me.....?". -al wick Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock Subaru 2.5 N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design info: http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 19:05:43 -0600 Bob White writes: > Hi Al, > > Welcome to the list. I'm looking forward to hearing more about > your > analysis. I've been critical of your cross posted comment and been > chastised for reacting to it out of context. I admit guilt. > > Bob W. > > On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 12:56:29 -0700 > al p wick wrote: > > > Allright. Hang me. > > > > First, someone cross posted my email on the subject. Totally fine > by me. > > Second, I haven't seen any previous posts on the subject, so blast > away! > > > > I just joined. It may not be apparent, but my goal is to reduce > flight > > risks. Regardless of type of power plant. > > > > My background. My entire work career dealt with failures. Day > after day > > investigating the causes for each failure. Huge variety. > Mechanical, > > electrical, systemic, you name it. More significantly, eventually > I had > > the power to change the response to failures. This allowed me to > test my > > theories on how to eliminate them. So there would be a failure, > I'd > > implement a change, then measure how often the failure occurred in > the > > future. Investigate, alter the solution, remeasure. There are all > these > > patterns to failures that we usually don't notice. It's > remarkable. > > > > When I first started looking into the rotary risks, I was shocked. > I > > thought "My God, I have to let these guys know!". But instead, I > ignored > > it for a few days,question my perception, then started the > process of > > measuring the risks instead of relying on impressions. I'm not > done, far > > from it. But it's so clear that the path most take is of extreme > risk, I > > thought it best to post what I had so far. I thought "maybe one or > two > > guys will read this and take more effective action at reducing > risk". > > > > I have already measured the Lyc risks. Yikes! Quite a bit higher > than I > > expected. They have significant crank, valve and head risk. The > total is > > 1 failure per 1800 hours. This based on 49k flight hours in Cozy > > aircraft over 5 year period. > > > > > > > > > > -al wick > > Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock > Subaru 2.5 > > N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon > > Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel > design info: > > http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html > > > > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > > > > > > -- > http://www.bob-white.com > N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (real soon) > > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > >