|
|
Hi Dale,
Maybe I didn't use good wording there. It is going to be difficult to peer review an installation from photos only. I know there was a lot of peer review after his first engine out landing and it was good and useful. There were two people on this list who even called him on the phone to help.
Personally I don't have enough time to keep up with all the message traffic on this list, so I only look at the archive for subject lines that are interesting to me. I did a search of the archive looking for clues after the fact, the things I wrote about were the only things that didn't look quite right. I may be completely wrong, and those items had nothing to do with the accident. No disrespect for Paul or the members of this list who only mean well. They are just concern items that I would like to see not repeated by someone else.
Perry
Perry,
I got the impression that you think that the peer-review process here may have failed Paul C. That may be so, but IIRC, all too often we weren't even told about what he was up to until it was a ~fait accompli~. I'd never seen the photo of his sump tank until after the crash. My personal archives show only one photo this year - of his snorkle scoop. The others that I've saved - which is darned near everything put up on the list, or pointed to - were all of his engine compartment, or things therein.
I'd have to go search to verify it, but didn't someone catch the weakness in the location of his fuel pumps - strapped to a strut on his engine mount? IIRc, that was right after the first engine out landing (the photo file is dated Mar-04)
It's true that our informal process isn't especially efficient; but no process can work if a piece of work isn't submitted for review.
My $.002,
Dale R.
From: "Perry Mick" <pjmick@mail.viclink.com>
[snip]
He made a couple of errors in my opinion that no one caught. [snip]
|
|