X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 10:29:53 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.220.48] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.7) with ESMTPS id 6578680 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 06 Nov 2013 09:24:45 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.220.48; envelope-from=legacyl2k@gmail.com Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id kq14so10554523pab.35 for ; Wed, 06 Nov 2013 06:24:08 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.68.189.229 with SMTP id gl5mr1774789pbc.195.1383747848423; Wed, 06 Nov 2013 06:24:08 -0800 (PST) X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.0.7] (71-35-70-47.phnx.qwest.net. [71.35.70.47]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id xs1sm48557919pac.7.2013.11.06.06.24.06 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Nov 2013 06:24:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Legacy Canopy Problem References: From: Mike's Gmail Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-5008196B-45DC-4847-BE48-33D55E98194E X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: X-Original-Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 07:24:06 -0700 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) --Apple-Mail-5008196B-45DC-4847-BE48-33D55E98194E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Todd, I think your on the right track. A takeoff safety system for those of us th= at look passed a warning light and a checklist. The system could sound and a= ctivate a flashing warning when the canopy is unlocked and the throttle push= ed beyond 50%. This is very airline like. A system that seem to work based= on the test of time... Mike Larkin Sent from my iPhone On Nov 5, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Todd Long wrote: > The problem with using just idiot light is we have trained ourselves to ig= nore it during the taxi. It would be nice if checklists solved all problems b= ut unfortunately they don't. At some point we all become idiots. Some just h= appened I have this happen at a worse time than others. Highly trained metho= dical airline pilot and military pilots had forgotten to put the landing gea= r down before I'm pretty sure there's a checklist for that. > Since checklists alone are going to solve the problem I suggest the follow= ing before any elaborate mechanical engineering that might have further unin= tended consequences. I would wire in a horn to that idiot light that sounds w= hen the throttle is pushed far enough forward for take off. A switch on the t= hrottle at 50% travel. This is a pretty common system in corporate jets and a= irliners. Call it a pre-take up configuration check. A light alone is not en= ough. I know of one incident where the door was left only on a pre-catch rat= her than latched on a citation. The crew took off and the door blew open and= flight. Fortunately they landed without incident. In the particular series t= here is an annunciator light for the door but no take off configuration chec= k horn. Unfortunately for that crew the bulbs in the annunciator happened to= be burned out. Essentially a perfect storm that could have resulted in fata= lities with the crew that follow the checklist but didn't actually complete t= he item. The callout was latched, no lights. > Everyone on this message board is flying some sort of very highly advanced= fast cross-country aircraft. Average piloting skills will not keep you safe= in this aircraft. We need to follow flows and quality checklists. Fly all p= hases of flight to the well thought out profiles. > If you can't follow a checklist, or fly the aircraft during takeoff and la= nding to a consistent profile you probably should not be flying. Having said= that, I'm pretty sure that everyone on this message board is capable of doi= ng this. > Safe flying, add a horn. >=20 > Typing and grammar errors courtesy of Siri and the iPhone. >=20 > On Nov 5, 2013, at 12:12, Mike's Gmail wrote: >=20 >> Jay, >>=20 >> So people do rolling takeoffs and add power slowly which delays the probl= em. Others just don't notice until its too late. >>=20 >> Mike >>=20 >> Sent from my iPhone >>=20 >> On Nov 5, 2013, at 10:25 AM, "Jay Phillips" wrot= e: >>=20 >>> I don=E2=80=99t understand how it is possible to take off with the canop= y unlatched. I don=E2=80=99t mean to express criticism, rather bewilderment.= >>> =20 >>> I have twice failed to latch the canopy on my Legacy prior to applying f= ull power for takeoff. Both times, as soon as full power was applied the can= opy lifted 3-4 inches. I pulled the power to idle, stopped the aircraft and s= ecured the canopy. Then kicked myself and continued on my way. >>> =20 >>> I know every aircraft is different. Is it that on some aircraft the cano= py fit is so tight that an unlatched canopy doesn=E2=80=99t open until the a= irspeed passes some threshold? In my cases the prop wash at full power was s= ufficient to lift the canopy. >>> =20 >>> Jay Phillips --Apple-Mail-5008196B-45DC-4847-BE48-33D55E98194E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Todd,

=
I think your on the right track.  A takeoff safety system for thos= e of us that look passed a warning light and a checklist. The system could s= ound and activate a flashing warning when the canopy is unlocked and the thr= ottle pushed beyond 50%.  This is very airline like.  A system tha= t seem to work based on the test of time...

Mike Larkin

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 5, 2013, at 2:57 PM= , Todd Long <toddlong1@gmail.com> wrote:

Since checklis= ts alone are going to solve the problem I suggest the following before any e= laborate mechanical engineering that might have further unintended consequen= ces. I would wire in a horn to that idiot light that sounds when the throttl= e is pushed far enough forward for take off. A switch on the throttle at 50%= travel. This is a pretty common system in corporate jets and airliners. Cal= l it a pre-take up configuration check. A light alone is not enough. I know o= f one incident where the door was left only on a pre-catch rather than latch= ed on a citation. The crew took off and the door blew open and flight. Fortu= nately they landed without incident. In the particular series there is an an= nunciator light for the door but no take off configuration check horn. Unfor= tunately for that crew the bulbs in the annunciator happened to be burned ou= t. Essentially a perfect storm that could have resulted in fatalities with t= he crew that follow the checklist but didn't actually complete the item. The= callout was latched, no lights.
Jay,

So people do rolling takeoffs and add p= ower slowly which delays the problem.  Others just don't notice until i= ts too late.

Mike

Sent from my iPhone
<= div>
On Nov 5, 2013, at 10:25 AM, "Jay Phillips" <jayph@fastairplane.net> wrote:

I don=E2=80=99t understand how it is poss= ible to take off with the canopy unlatched. I don=E2=80=99t mean to express c= riticism, rather bewilderment.

<= span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-se= rif";color:#1F497D"> 

= I have twice failed to latch the canopy on my Lega= cy prior to applying full power for takeoff. Both times, as soon as full pow= er was applied the canopy lifted 3-4 inches. I pulled the power to idle, sto= pped the aircraft and secured the canopy. Then kicked myself and continued o= n my way.

 

I know every aircraft is different. Is it that on some aircraft the can= opy fit is so tight that an unlatched canopy doesn=E2=80=99t open until the a= irspeed passes some threshold? In my cases the prop wash at full power was s= ufficient to lift the canopy.

 

<= span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-se= rif";color:#1F497D">Jay Phillips

= --Apple-Mail-5008196B-45DC-4847-BE48-33D55E98194E--