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 984221 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 AABBLCG9KA3N5UD2 for (sender ); Fri, 3 Jun 2005 20:11:37 -0700 (PDT) X-UNTD-OriginStamp: L941HVjjYzDhN3itp//mkFmkn11r2XXeO58CeOd3swMVTJoUjLOtyw== Received: (from alwick@juno.com) by m12.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id KUMCCZRE; Fri, 03 Jun 2005 20:11:23 PDT To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 19:50:16 -0700 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Rotary risks Message-ID: <20050603.201111.1276.23.alwick@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=--__JNP_000_2f4e.1b01.5105 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 8-6,10-11,18-19,24-34,36-38,48-101,102-32767 From: al p wick X-ContentStamp: 28:14:1630794656 X-MAIL-INFO:238d8dc9f1a9755061d065c92d6524b9e0e1e465904da584f190e4e1906d907059dd20ad8de5c9a0c900f1b02438fdb050a994dde995f9b175d1edd089a4d1cd94a4415dd1c4dd304581558934d9ad209500e590c0e5ade459e4550dd509c071b984090d449d4490a9b9a544e4242494fda49499a4d1b454548944e195c0e99000f98d8df1f061597dc9b0653851c9999494745131ddd41d40b14030 X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 127.0.0.1|localhost|m12.lax.untd.com|alwick@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_2f4e.1b01.5105 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think it's easy to assume that I advocate flying Subaru's. I don't. Regardless who I'm talking to, it looks like the Lycoming is the least risk decision. For now....I think that will change in a year or so because newsgroups like this make it so easy for successes to be shared. You bring up very important points. If you guys can develop robust solutions for each of the challenges, then you can end up with a powerplant that has some fabulous failure modes. Here is a great example, I suspect your ECM shutdown risk is now somewhere around 1 time in 1000 (maybe 500) hours. But with simple changes that make the system genuinely redundant, you would automatically raise that to 1 time in 1000000 hours. That is fantastic for a custom low volume ECM. You describe each engine being different. That is a huge risk item. Creative endeavors are always risky. As soon as someone comes up with an optimized cnc manifold, your risks drop a little. Optimized exhaust manifold, they drop some more. Optimized fuel pump plumbing proven using facts( not theory BS) they drop more. -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, 03 Jun 2005 19:59:19 -0500 David Staten writes: Welcome, Al... Lets see if in the end IF the overall risk ends up being greater or less.. I suspect that the TYPES of risks involved will be somewhat different (as in - failure modes).. between the two engine types..the other thing to keep in mind is that there is not a standardized installation of the rotary package (not counting the powersport engine) so there is likely a tremendous variability from engine to engine just among the rotary types. I acknowledge that I may be trading one set of "known" risks for another set of "unknown risks" but time will tell. In the meantime, I don't plan on doing anything foolish, such as running with scissors. Glad to have you here, Dave 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 >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html ----__JNP_000_2f4e.1b01.5105 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think it's easy to assume that I advocate flying Subaru's. I don't.= =20 Regardless who I'm talking to, it looks like the Lycoming is the least risk= =20 decision. For now....I think that will change in a year or so because = newsgroups=20 like this make it so easy for successes to be shared.
 
You bring up very important points. If you guys can develop robust=20 solutions for each of the challenges, then you can end up with a powerplant= that=20 has some fabulous failure modes. Here is a great example, I suspect = your=20 ECM shutdown risk is now somewhere around 1 time in 1000 (maybe 500) hours.= But=20 with simple changes that make the system genuinely redundant, you= =20 would automatically raise that to 1 time in 1000000 hours. That is = fantastic for=20 a custom low volume ECM.
 
You describe each engine being different. That is a huge risk item.=20 Creative endeavors are always risky. As soon as someone comes up with an=20 optimized cnc manifold, your risks drop a little.=20 Optimized exhaust manifold, they drop some more. Optimized fuel pump=20 plumbing proven using facts( not theory BS) they drop more.
 
-al wick
Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by = stock=20 Subaru 2.5
N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, OregonProp=20 construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design=20 info:
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html
 
 
 
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 19:59:19 -0500 David Staten <Dastaten@earthlink.net>=20 writes:
Welcome, Al...
 
Lets see if in the end IF the overall = risk=20 ends up being greater or less.. I suspect that the TYPES of risks = involved=20 will be somewhat different (as in - failure modes).. between the two = engine=20 types..the other thing to keep in mind is that there is not a = standardized=20 installation of the rotary package (not counting the powersport engine) = so=20 there is likely a tremendous variability from engine to engine just among= the=20 rotary types. I acknowledge that I may be trading one set of "known" = risks for=20 another set of "unknown risks" but time will tell. In the meantime, I don= 't=20 plan on doing anything foolish, such as running with scissors.

= Glad to=20 have you here,
Dave

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.=20

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".=20

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
      

  

>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/

>>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
 

----__JNP_000_2f4e.1b01.5105--