Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.65; envelope-from=Dastaten@earthlink.net
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple;
  s=test1; d=earthlink.net;
  h=Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
  b=rM7n7wTGNnuIwf1M8gW3BYB7mWWnOPkNlhnkNT4Ts2CCJtSpCXb0raDHdgh/4bin;
Message-ID: <42A161F8.8030407@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 03:10:32 -0500
From: David Staten <Dastaten@earthlink.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Rotary risks
References: <list-984232@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-984232@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I concur... when something goes wrong, the ideas/potential failure 
points start flowing out in free discussion. Some are dismissed, some 
get a lot of weight, and some are never validated nor disproved. Part of 
what makes this such a successful online community is that we exchange 
ideas freely, and usually objectively.
 
I hope to see things progress to the point that folks who DONT want to 
do the engineering/experimenting will have bolt on options available to 
them in the near future: Its coming - between finished blocks from 
Bruce, intakes from Bruce, Mounts from CCI, Electronics and gearboxes 
from Tracy.. its starting to take on the appearance of a quasi-firewall 
forward (or aft) option.
 
Even if that point occurs, there will always be someone wanting to "do 
it better" or get a bit more performance by customizing, or just trying 
a different approach. I will acknowledge there is more than one way to 
skin a cat.. I just want to be able to make cat skinning as safe and 
risk free as PRACTICAL.
 
Dave

Ernest Christley wrote:

> al p wick wrote:
>
>> 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.....?".  
>>
>
> Oh, no.  Trust me on this one.  NOBODY gets away with that one.
>
> You could fill a book with the number of possible causes this list 
> came up with for Ed's latest 'adventure'.  And that has hopefully been 
> folded back in to positive steps that people who've been following can 
> take to improve their success and reliability.
>
> One thing you could not be aware of is the latest discussion on 
> forming and 'inspection' organization.  The biggest objection to it 
> has been the idea of 'approved systems'.  Nobody wants it like that.  
> It is a very independant group over here.  As soon as someone comes up 
> with an optimized cnc manifold, a few will buy it and a whole bunch of 
> others will say they're trying something different.  We're kinda weird 
> like that.  Go figure.
>