Date   

Re: Spark plug anti-seize didn't work

David A Froble
 

On 7/29/2021 2:29 PM, Del Schier wrote:
Hi all,

I know your probably at Oshkosh but I am getting ready for my CI sign-off
today. I could barely get out two of the auto plugs and adaptors for my
Lightspeed. I haven't even tried the other two or the aircraft plugs yet.

It has only been about 30 hrs since the last inspection. I put them in with
Permatex aluminum anti-seize and torqued them to the Lightspeed specs. I
stripped the ratchet in my long 3/8"handle in the process!
This caught my attention. Just how much torque did you use?

I seem to recall a dim past memory about using maybe 20 ft/lb for auto spark plugs. Maybe a bit less with anti-seize.

For me, I'm just glad to get the washers compressed. I've heard of plugs working their way out, never happened to me.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486


Re: Spark plug anti-seize didn't work

kent ashton
 

You could be over-torquing. Lots of sources say reduce the recommended torque by 20% when using anti-seize. NGK also says no A.S. is needed on their plugs.
https://ngksparkplugs.com/en/resources/5-things-you-should-know-about-spark-plugs
-Kent

On Jul 29, 2021, at 2:29 PM, Del Schier <cozypilot@...> wrote:

Hi all,

I know your probably at Oshkosh but I am getting ready for my CI sign-off
today. I could barely get out two of the auto plugs and adaptors for my
Lightspeed. I haven't even tried the other two or the aircraft plugs yet.

It has only been about 30 hrs since the last inspection. I put them in with
Permatex aluminum anti-seize and torqued them to the Lightspeed specs. I
stripped the ratchet in my long 3/8"handle in the process! I ran a 14 mm tap
through the adaptors, wire brushed the outside threads and used new plugs.

Obviously I am using the wrong anti-seize! I found this article:
http://mechanicsupport.blogspot.com/2010/10/spark-plug-anti-seize.html and
after reading that I don't know what to use.

What should I be using?
Thanks in advance.


Del Schier
Cozy IV N197DL
Cannon Creek Airpark 15FL








Re: Spark plug anti-seize didn't work

Bulent Aliev
 

Del,
I always used the copper high temperature one. I think it was made by Champion?
Every time I run the tap thru to clear carbon deposits, massive or auto plugs.

On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 2:29 PM Del Schier <cozypilot@...> wrote:
Hi all,

I know your probably at Oshkosh but I am getting ready for my CI sign-off
today.  I could barely get out two of the auto plugs and adaptors for my
Lightspeed.  I haven't even tried the other two or the aircraft plugs yet.

It has only been about 30 hrs since the last inspection.  I put them in with
Permatex aluminum anti-seize and torqued them to the Lightspeed specs. I
stripped the ratchet in my long 3/8"handle in the process! I ran a 14 mm tap
through the adaptors, wire brushed the outside threads and used new plugs.

Obviously I am using the wrong anti-seize! I found this article:
http://mechanicsupport.blogspot.com/2010/10/spark-plug-anti-seize.html and
after reading that I don't know what to use.

What should I be using?
Thanks in advance.


Del Schier
Cozy IV N197DL
Cannon Creek Airpark 15FL








--
Bulent Aliev
Enginegear
ph +1 954.557.1019
fax +1 386.957.4473
Bulent@...
www.enginegearonline.com


Re: Spark plug anti-seize didn't work

Dale Martin
 

Del,

Give this a try.  It has never failed for us.


Dale


On Thu, Jul 29, 2021, 11:29 Del Schier <cozypilot@...> wrote:
Hi all,

I know your probably at Oshkosh but I am getting ready for my CI sign-off
today.  I could barely get out two of the auto plugs and adaptors for my
Lightspeed.  I haven't even tried the other two or the aircraft plugs yet.

It has only been about 30 hrs since the last inspection.  I put them in with
Permatex aluminum anti-seize and torqued them to the Lightspeed specs. I
stripped the ratchet in my long 3/8"handle in the process! I ran a 14 mm tap
through the adaptors, wire brushed the outside threads and used new plugs.

Obviously I am using the wrong anti-seize! I found this article:
http://mechanicsupport.blogspot.com/2010/10/spark-plug-anti-seize.html and
after reading that I don't know what to use.

What should I be using?
Thanks in advance.


Del Schier
Cozy IV N197DL
Cannon Creek Airpark 15FL









Spark plug anti-seize didn't work

Del Schier
 

Hi all,

I know your probably at Oshkosh but I am getting ready for my CI sign-off
today. I could barely get out two of the auto plugs and adaptors for my
Lightspeed. I haven't even tried the other two or the aircraft plugs yet.

It has only been about 30 hrs since the last inspection. I put them in with
Permatex aluminum anti-seize and torqued them to the Lightspeed specs. I
stripped the ratchet in my long 3/8"handle in the process! I ran a 14 mm tap
through the adaptors, wire brushed the outside threads and used new plugs.

Obviously I am using the wrong anti-seize! I found this article:
http://mechanicsupport.blogspot.com/2010/10/spark-plug-anti-seize.html and
after reading that I don't know what to use.

What should I be using?
Thanks in advance.


Del Schier
Cozy IV N197DL
Cannon Creek Airpark 15FL


need a rude OSH to Milwaukee tomorrow

Ryszard Zadow
 

Anyone headed to MKE by ground transportation. tomorrow? We need a ride for one person.

RyZ


Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

Izzy
 




Izzy
(603)410-7277


On Friday, July 23, 2021, 04:57:07 PM EDT, I. N. Briggs via groups.io <inbriggs@...> wrote:


wilco, it might also be published somewhere. Central States may have it, if not I’ll get it to Mike. 

Izzy
(603)410-7277

On Jul 23, 2021, at 11:31, stephen wolpin <swolpin@...> wrote:


Izzy, please do send the hi-rez version.  
Thx.

   Steve Wolpin 
LongEZ N50MH
swolpin@...
       From iPhone



On Jul 23, 2021, at 12:49 AM, I. N. Briggs via groups.io <inbriggs@...> wrote:


Here you go Cookie. 

Low resolution version is attached. I think they are available on some of the forums. I have a higher res version I can send if your mailbox can handle it. 

Izzy
(603)410-7277


On Thursday, July 22, 2021, 10:01:56 PM EDT, skovbjerg <skovbjerg@...> wrote:


Would love to see those plans…..
:-)
Jay

On Jul 22, 2021, at 18:06, Bob Holliston <bob.holliston@...> wrote:


Actually, I think Burt designed Mike's roll over. Canopy gone? Burt also designed stronger latches to prevent that. I have the plans.... somewhere. I think very few have been built, and I only know of one person that's done it, but I don't get out much. 

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 4:48 PM David A Froble <davef@...> wrote:
On 7/22/2021 12:40 PM, Bob Holliston wrote:
> I have a dedicated roll bar in my LE but have always thought it would be
> pretty easy to reinforce the plans headrest to make it a roll over
> structure. I've sawed a couple of the stock headrests off and they weigh
> 1/2 pound. My roll bar weighs six pounds. If one used several pounds of
> glass (E glass, carbon, kevlar - take your pick or a combination) and
> glassed the headrest bringing the glass down onto the seatback, front
> and rear and the fuselage sides might well do the trick. What do you think?

What do I think?

Wow, you like to leave things wide open, huh?

While I've thought about this topic quite a bit, I have no experience to
relate, nor engineering data.  However ...

I think that Mike's solution is better than a roll bar.  Remember, I
could be very wrong.  If there is some type of a crash, and inverted
aircraft, I'd guess that normally the aircraft would still be in motion,
sliding on the ground, or such.  If the canopy is gone, a roll bar could
"dig in" and that might be a bad thing.  Of course, with Mike's
solution, if the canopy is gone, probably so is any protection.

What I'd prefer would be to scrap the plans canopy design, and go to
something like the Berkut canopies.  The "hoop" that supports both the
front and read canopies is probably a rather strong structure, at least
it should be, and would give the best of either, Mikes solution or a
roll bar.  On top of that, the Berkut canopies just look so "kool".
Maybe easier to seal against leakage also.

Best plan, don't crash ....

--
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486







--

<Rutan Rollover Plans lower res.pdf>


Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

John Lambert
 

Very sad news indeed! Initial reports cite one fatal and one in critical condition.

 

From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io [mailto:canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dale Martin
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2021 3:43 PM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

 

Oh Geez.....   When I thought things couldn't get any worse having Dale "Snort" Snodgrass killed here at Lewiston (KLWS) a few days ago.

Marc was a precious guy with lots of stories who was always ready to help if he could.  I shall miss talking to him.

 

Godspeed Marc

 


Dale
http://www.long-ez.com
=====================>


“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke.

 

 

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 8:54 AM Don B via groups.io <donberlin475=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Sad news. Marc Borom landed his Longez  short at Ryan Field, flipped over and was killed this morning.
> On Jul 27, 2021, at 10:51 AM, kent ashton <kjashton@...> wrote:
>
> You should search for a summary of  changes.  If I had one I would link to it.
>
> A few I can think of are beefing up the engine mount extrusions for heavier engines, reinforcing the mount points in the side of the fuselage for the MLG attach angles,  extending the nose for heavier engines, changing the side-stick to a Cozy style (the plans style could get sloppy).  There have been lots of improvements over the years.
> -K
>
>> On Jul 27, 2021, at 11:20 AM, Fridlo4 via groups.io <fridlo45=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
>>
>> Are there ANY other canard problems other than the headrest? Asked as builder of  N86LE.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>






Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

Dale Martin
 

Oh Geez.....   When I thought things couldn't get any worse having Dale "Snort" Snodgrass killed here at Lewiston (KLWS) a few days ago.
Marc was a precious guy with lots of stories who was always ready to help if he could.  I shall miss talking to him.

Godspeed Marc


Dale
http://www.long-ez.com
=====================>

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke.


On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 8:54 AM Don B via groups.io <donberlin475=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Sad news. Marc Borom landed his Longez  short at Ryan Field, flipped over and was killed this morning.
> On Jul 27, 2021, at 10:51 AM, kent ashton <kjashton@...> wrote:
>
> You should search for a summary of  changes.  If I had one I would link to it.
>
> A few I can think of are beefing up the engine mount extrusions for heavier engines, reinforcing the mount points in the side of the fuselage for the MLG attach angles,  extending the nose for heavier engines, changing the side-stick to a Cozy style (the plans style could get sloppy).  There have been lots of improvements over the years.
> -K
>
>> On Jul 27, 2021, at 11:20 AM, Fridlo4 via groups.io <fridlo45=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
>>
>> Are there ANY other canard problems other than the headrest? Asked as builder of  N86LE.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>







Re: Suddenly changing CHT/Oil Temps

Bob Holliston
 

I'm not a downdraft cooling fan but I'll bet raising and widening those inlets by 50 - 100% would make a big difference. Those oil flow tracks look awful. 


On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 6:50 AM Terry Schubert <jschuber@...> wrote:
Do these unusual high temps also occur at low altitude cruise?
 
You might look at cooling air pressure differential across the cylinders.  I don't know what engine you have but around 4"-5" of water column pressure is needed to cool a Lycoming at rated RPM.  Check back issue CSA Newsletters for delta P, cooling, expansion, etc.
 
Try a few drops of oil on the entry to the high pressure plenum to see what the air flow is going into or perhaps reversing flow at the cowl's air entrance.  See attached pics showing reverse flow.
 
Send me a few pics of your firewall aft installation and inlets.
 
If pressure is too low there will be inadequate cool air mass across, CH & O cooler fins and temps will increase.  A new air leak in the high pressure plenum could easily cause that drop in cooling air pressure and have an effect on all components requiring air for cooling.  
 
 
Terry Schubert
Central States Association Newsletter Editor

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Drew Swenson via groups.io" <n171ml=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Cc: COZY Builders <cozy_builders@...>
Subject: Re: [c-a] Suddenly changing CHT/Oil Temps
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 00:50:02 -0400

New sensors grounded all the way back to the Dynon?

 

On Jul 23, 2021, at 6:22 PM, Marc J. Zeitlin <marc.j.zeitlin@...> wrote:

Folks:
 
I've got a customer with a Long-EZ with an O-320 H2AD engine. It's been running apparently fine (and still is) for a few hundred hours since it was installed on the plane. The current owner (not the builder) had me install a new Dynon EMS D10 engine monitoring system, to replace the ancient Rocky Mountain Instruments engine monitor that's been in there since the plane was first flown in 2014 or so. The plane has downdraft cooling with relatively standard (if not well shaped) air inlets above the strakes, and metal plenums.
 
The owner had always reported CHT's in the low 400's in climb and 360's - 380's in cruise, which is fine, and oil temps in the 190 - 210F range. Also fine.
 
We did nothing other than install a Dynon Autopilot and the Dynon EMS, and he changed the oil (not filter) with new Aeroshell 15W-50.
 
On the three flights that he's now attempted since the EMS install, he's seeing CHT's at 400F in cruise at 120 KIAS and 2400 RPM, 10,500 ft. (don't know OAT). The OT is running >250F (yeah, we know the redline is 245F, but I'm going on vacation for 5 weeks and he needs to get the plane home to an A&P that will have time to look at it). Obviously, these temps are both NOT what we've seen before and are too high at those power settings.
 
So. We did NOTHING to the engine itself, other than change the OT sender to the new Dynon single wire sender, and install the new Dynon EGT and CHT probes. After the second flight, we pulled the sender and Vernatherm and immersed them in a pot of hot oil with a candy thermometer for calibration. The Vernatherm extended fully and the OT sender read within 5F of the candy thermometer up to about 260F, so we believe that the OT's we're seeing with the new system are correct. As indicated, the engine's operation seems exactly the same to the owner as it did before the work.
 
My initial reaction is that the info we're seeing on the Dynon EMS is real, and that the info provided by the RMI system was not. It had homemade CHT senders and an unknown OT sender (2 wire, but unclear whether it was the RMI recommended one or another homemade sender). If this is true, then the engine's been running VERY hot for 7 years or so, both CHT's and OT's. Given the downdraft cooling (harder to make work correctly then updraft, except for a very few) and the homemade sensors and uncalibrated (confirmed by the builder) micromonitor, it's not impossible to believe that this is the case. However...
 
What's an alternative possibility here? Somehow, both CHT's and OT's happened to change substantially just at the same time as the engine monitor was replaced? Something else?
 
Looking for ideas on possible causes... Obviously, the owner would not like to continue to cook his engine if he can help it, and yet reconfiguring the cooling system is a LARGE job...
 
Thanks.
 
--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2021                     Burnside Aerospace



--


Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

Don B
 

Sad news. Marc Borom landed his Longez short at Ryan Field, flipped over and was killed this morning.

On Jul 27, 2021, at 10:51 AM, kent ashton <kjashton@...> wrote:

You should search for a summary of changes. If I had one I would link to it.

A few I can think of are beefing up the engine mount extrusions for heavier engines, reinforcing the mount points in the side of the fuselage for the MLG attach angles, extending the nose for heavier engines, changing the side-stick to a Cozy style (the plans style could get sloppy). There have been lots of improvements over the years.
-K

On Jul 27, 2021, at 11:20 AM, Fridlo4 via groups.io <fridlo45@...> wrote:

Are there ANY other canard problems other than the headrest? Asked as builder of N86LE.









Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

kent ashton
 

You should search for a summary of changes. If I had one I would link to it.

A few I can think of are beefing up the engine mount extrusions for heavier engines, reinforcing the mount points in the side of the fuselage for the MLG attach angles, extending the nose for heavier engines, changing the side-stick to a Cozy style (the plans style could get sloppy). There have been lots of improvements over the years.
-K

On Jul 27, 2021, at 11:20 AM, Fridlo4 via groups.io <fridlo45@...> wrote:

Are there ANY other canard problems other than the headrest? Asked as builder of N86LE.





Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

John Lambert
 

Well .... Yes ... Occasionally the people flying them, as with any aircraft!
:)

There is no stupid proof aircraft!

-----Original Message-----
From: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
[mailto:canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io] On Behalf Of Fridlo4 via
groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2021 10:21 AM
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Subject: Re: [c-a] Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

Are there ANY other canard problems other than the headrest? Asked as
builder of N86LE.


Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

Fridlo4
 

Are there ANY other canard problems other than the headrest? Asked as builder of N86LE.


Re: Suddenly changing CHT/Oil Temps

Terry Schubert
 

Do these unusual high temps also occur at low altitude cruise?
 
You might look at cooling air pressure differential across the cylinders.  I don't know what engine you have but around 4"-5" of water column pressure is needed to cool a Lycoming at rated RPM.  Check back issue CSA Newsletters for delta P, cooling, expansion, etc.
 
Try a few drops of oil on the entry to the high pressure plenum to see what the air flow is going into or perhaps reversing flow at the cowl's air entrance.  See attached pics showing reverse flow.
 
Send me a few pics of your firewall aft installation and inlets.
 
If pressure is too low there will be inadequate cool air mass across, CH & O cooler fins and temps will increase.  A new air leak in the high pressure plenum could easily cause that drop in cooling air pressure and have an effect on all components requiring air for cooling.  
 
 
Terry Schubert
Central States Association Newsletter Editor


---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Drew Swenson via groups.io" <n171ml@...>
To: canard-aviators@canardzone.groups.io
Cc: COZY Builders <cozy_builders@...>
Subject: Re: [c-a] Suddenly changing CHT/Oil Temps
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 00:50:02 -0400

New sensors grounded all the way back to the Dynon?

 

On Jul 23, 2021, at 6:22 PM, Marc J. Zeitlin <marc.j.zeitlin@...> wrote:

Folks:
 
I've got a customer with a Long-EZ with an O-320 H2AD engine. It's been running apparently fine (and still is) for a few hundred hours since it was installed on the plane. The current owner (not the builder) had me install a new Dynon EMS D10 engine monitoring system, to replace the ancient Rocky Mountain Instruments engine monitor that's been in there since the plane was first flown in 2014 or so. The plane has downdraft cooling with relatively standard (if not well shaped) air inlets above the strakes, and metal plenums.
 
The owner had always reported CHT's in the low 400's in climb and 360's - 380's in cruise, which is fine, and oil temps in the 190 - 210F range. Also fine.
 
We did nothing other than install a Dynon Autopilot and the Dynon EMS, and he changed the oil (not filter) with new Aeroshell 15W-50.
 
On the three flights that he's now attempted since the EMS install, he's seeing CHT's at 400F in cruise at 120 KIAS and 2400 RPM, 10,500 ft. (don't know OAT). The OT is running >250F (yeah, we know the redline is 245F, but I'm going on vacation for 5 weeks and he needs to get the plane home to an A&P that will have time to look at it). Obviously, these temps are both NOT what we've seen before and are too high at those power settings.
 
So. We did NOTHING to the engine itself, other than change the OT sender to the new Dynon single wire sender, and install the new Dynon EGT and CHT probes. After the second flight, we pulled the sender and Vernatherm and immersed them in a pot of hot oil with a candy thermometer for calibration. The Vernatherm extended fully and the OT sender read within 5F of the candy thermometer up to about 260F, so we believe that the OT's we're seeing with the new system are correct. As indicated, the engine's operation seems exactly the same to the owner as it did before the work.
 
My initial reaction is that the info we're seeing on the Dynon EMS is real, and that the info provided by the RMI system was not. It had homemade CHT senders and an unknown OT sender (2 wire, but unclear whether it was the RMI recommended one or another homemade sender). If this is true, then the engine's been running VERY hot for 7 years or so, both CHT's and OT's. Given the downdraft cooling (harder to make work correctly then updraft, except for a very few) and the homemade sensors and uncalibrated (confirmed by the builder) micromonitor, it's not impossible to believe that this is the case. However...
 
What's an alternative possibility here? Somehow, both CHT's and OT's happened to change substantially just at the same time as the engine monitor was replaced? Something else?
 
Looking for ideas on possible causes... Obviously, the owner would not like to continue to cook his engine if he can help it, and yet reconfiguring the cooling system is a LARGE job...
 
Thanks.
 
--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2021                     Burnside Aerospace


RAFE Forum tomorrow morning 0830, Stage 3

Ryszard Zadow
 

For those at OSH please stop by the Rutan Aircraft Flying Experience forum tomorrow morning at 8:30 am, forum stage 3. Lots of cool stuff to talk about including a couple big announcements.

Wednesday catch RAFE on EAA radio at 9:30 am.

Thursday at 11am join COBA for the annual walk around forum looking at the variety of EZs on the flight line and discussing efficiency and modifications. This yeas it’s being hosted by Leif Johnson, Mike Beasley and Dave Adams. It will begin at the RAFE Sid Tolchin LongEZ parked on the first spot on EZ Street, right next to the Homebuilt Hangar.

Saturday morning join RAFE for the Future of Rutan Designs Symposium, 8:30 am Forum stage 5. Like 2019, this will be a facilitated open mike discussion between the audience and a panel of experts. This year the opening topic will be Insurance and the aging Pilot. Several representatives from the aviatiin insurance industry will be on the panel including Tracy Martin of Aviation Insurance Resources.

See y’all there!

Ryszard


Regulations re: approaches at 1.3Vs

Marc J. Zeitlin
 

Folks:

I had some discussions with folks over the years regarding approach speeds in our (or any) aircraft, and after seeing the writeup in the latest Squadron III newsletter (Dave Orr quoted me from an email to him), I went back to find the regs that discussed approach speeds. They were:

and:

Now, NEITHER of these is regulatory for E-AB aircraft, since they're Part 23, and not only that, but they're the PREVIOUS version of Part 23, which is no longer in force. The new version of Part 23 is not prescriptive wrt this (or anything else, for that matter).

So my statement in the newsletter, and previously in an email or two to others, re: the regulatory aspects of flying approach at 1.3 Vs was correct ONLY with respect to the design of certificated aircraft and the definition of Vref.

Part 91, however, does NOT regulate what speed the pilot must use (or must not use) during approaches, so any speed is LEGAL for the pilot to fly, whatever the aircraft may have been designed to do.

My bad on that regulatory claim. I will state, however, that flying approaches at 1.3Vs and no slower is good practice in our planes, given their characteristics, but we're not REQUIRED to do so.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2021                     Burnside Aerospace


Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

aviationeyes
 

Wow. Sounds like a great story to discuss on Friday virtual shop nights. 

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021, at 8:06 PM, Charles McDougal wrote:
Here’s something in the “my two cents” category; totally anecdotal. 

I had two engine failures in my EZ, both at night, both resulting in an off airport landing. One was a piston pin plug failure, eventually causing oil starvation. The other was a new Superior Air Parts crankshaft snapping like a twig in an all new professionally built engine with less than 400 hours TT. In both events, the airplane stayed upright. In the second, my wife was with me. (Yes, we are still married). We got a little banged up but no injuries requiring treatment. 
Cmcd



On Jul 13, 2021, at 11:03 AM, KEN4ZZ via groups.io <ken4zz@...> wrote:


Hi Izzy-

Just FYI - I wouldn't get to worked up re using that data.  I'm line 28.  It WAS a roll over - not listed as such.  Listed as 'substantial damage'.   I guess that's subjective, but I had N4ZZ repaired and flying the next spring.  I calls my plane a LongEZ.  Nope; it's a VariEze.  Point is, while I have no doubt that your analysis methodology is sound, the source data was perhaps, ummmmmm, many times recorded in a less than precise manner.

I've been told by several folks that non-commercial light aircraft accidents that are non-fatal do not get high priority from the NTSB.  True???  I can't say one way or another.

Ken

On 7/13/2021 11:00 AM, I. N. Briggs via groups.io wrote:
Correction, 
"there are 27 accident Event ID's that report the aircraft ended up inverted, suggesting an 8.5% probability the aircraft will come to rest inverted. "

Should read
"there are 27 accident Event ID's that report the aircraft ended up inverted, suggesting an 12% probability the aircraft will come to rest inverted. "

Izzy
(603)410-7277


On Tuesday, July 13, 2021, 11:53:19 AM EDT, I. N. Briggs via groups.io <inbriggs@...> wrote:


Attached is an analysis I performed on the NTSB Database in 2011. The reason I did this was to try to determine how often a canard could roll over during an accident with an eye towards justifying the effort, weight and complexity of designing reliable and functional rollover protection in my Cozy IV. This analysis result is reflected in the "Rollover?" field for each record. 

The list includes a record of every NTSB reported Rutan based canard accident the NTSB investigated which I was able to identify from 1983 until 2011. The list selection criteria was Rutan or Rutan based designs only. Because the builder could name the design anything they wanted to, it's possible there are Rutan based canards not included in this list, particularly if they had an unconventional Make or Model name. If the NTSB didn't report on it, it wasn't in the list, so it's likely there are many that never captured the attention of the NTSB.

I identified 229 NTSB accident events meeting the criteria in the date range. No data was published prior to 1983. 

The accident reports were text only and typically no photos of the scene were available so I only reported "Rollover?=yes" where there was some comment or other evidence that the aircraft ended up inverted. In some cases, I searched the archives, CP and Canard Newsletters for additional details for a given accident. 

There are 27 accident Event ID's that report the aircraft ended up inverted, suggesting an 8.5% probability the aircraft will come to rest inverted. Out of those 27 records, 9 Event Id's reported at least one fatality. So if the aircraft does end up inverted on the ground, there's at least a 1 in 3 change someone won't survive it. 

The actual numbers are probably higher since many of the reports didn't explicitly state the final resting orientation of the aircraft and photos were not available unless I paid huge sums of money to the government and requested the "blue file" (or something like that) from the NTSB for a given accident. 

Now, is the fact that it's inverted the reason for the fatality? No, that's not a valid conclusion. But the ratios are significant enough that a reasonable person might decide that the design could be made safer with correctly designed rollover protection. So who's responsibility is it to design such a system? The builder? The Operator? If it's not correctly designed, it could make things worse, as is the case with N795DB. 

Given my personal priorities (1. Safety, 2. Reliability, 3. Performance, 4. Aesthetics), the numbers suggest rollover protection is worth the extra weight,time to build and complexity for some builders and fliers. 

When I went to the community with this, there wasn't much of a splash and a lot of pushback. I attributed the indifference to a lack of ownership for the design (which supports Dick VanGrunsven's comments). Some feel the plans provide adequate protection, but the numbers don't support this. Since no one is responsible for the design anymore, we are left to our own "devices". Sadly, N795DB had an improper rollover protection device installed, a side hinged canopy (on a Cozy 4) and spar mounted battery that departed the mount. The result was a battery that hit the canopy support when it flew off the spar, which twisted the canopy clockwise, then broke the rollover protection that was incorrectly bolted to the top of the pilot seat back. The metal rollover bar impacted the pilot at the base of his skull which resulted fatal blunt force trauma to the back of the pilots head. This was not in the NTSB report. This information came from a direct interview with the widow who shared with me the autopsy report. The accident would likely have been survivable had the builder used something like Mike's design. 

Mike Melvill created some plans (attached) for rollover protection which you can actually see installed in his LongEze in the July 2021 Canard Calendar. 

Tell Tracy I said hello and good luck with her presentation. 

Izzy
(603)410-7277


On Monday, July 12, 2021, 09:49:42 PM EDT, Ryszard Zadow <ryszardzadow@...> wrote:


The reason for the subject of this post comes from the comment Dick VanGrunsven made at the 2019 RAFE forum "The Future of Rutan Designs Symposium". Dick stated the safety record of "orphaned designs:" was not good. Though I believe we have more support out there than most "orphaned designs" like it of not, we technically fit in that definition so I was wondering if anyone has every actually crunched the numbers by searching the NTSB and/or Air Safety Foundation databases? 

We're hosting that forum again this year. The lead in topic will be about insurance and the aging Pilot. Tracy Martin of Aircraft Insurance Resources will be on the stage and hopefully a few other experts like we had in 2019. Tracy will discuss the dilemma many Pilots face now and we all may one day. 

See y'all there July 31, 0830 am , Forum Stage 5 

If you missed that 2019 forum the full recording of it is on YouTube at The Future of Rutan Designs Symposium AirVenture 2019 





-- 
  



Re: Whats the true safety record for Rutan Designs?

James Russell
 

Hi All:

I have a section of the cockpit surround of an Indy car - the laminate is very thick - see photos.

Composite shatter when they fail - metals bend. Every (metal) roll-over bar I've seen that has been used hard - bent over where the fore/aft braces attach, but it was still there...

A driver I knew didn't make it when he came out under the Road Atlanta bridge turn airborne upside down backwards, his roll-over assy was welded to a doubler riveted to the tub in tension. When he touched down, the rivets failed, and the assy came off.

This was a Martini Formula Atlantic and this was pre-chicane Road Atlanta, so the cars were doing 165 mph before braking.

You really have to carry the loads into primary structure. Plus metal is easier to engineer and build, in my opinion.

My $00.01.

Regards,
James


Re: COZY: Re: [c-a] Suddenly changing CHT/Oil Temps

Marc J. Zeitlin
 

Drew Swenson wrote:

New sensors grounded all the way back to the Dynon?

People seem overly focused on the grounding issue. While that certainly can be the cause of jittery and noisy readings, The OT probe is reading steady and as stated, matched the candy thermometer to within a few degrees in hot oil from under 200F to 260F. So while a grounding issue certainly is a concern in engine monitoring installations, in THIS case, there's no problem.

And since all CHT probes are two wire thermocouple probes as supplied by Dynon, with an extension harness as fabricated by SteinAir, there can be no grounding issue there as well.

There are no issues with the two wire OP or FP probes - both reading nominal values.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2021                     Burnside Aerospace

1081 - 1100 of 110771