|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

08-11-2013, 06:27 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 565
|
|
Safety ideas [long]
This thread about a ballistic parachute for RVs got me thinking about the many ways we can add extra safety features to our Experimental aircraft. I'm starting this thread to get more ideas...maybe Paul Dye could expand this to a Kitplanes article?
- Vans A-model fixes. Anti-Splat Aero has several fixes to reduce the likelihood of the nose gear digging in, causing a tip over.
- Pros: Not hard to install or retrofit. Some testing has been done with some of the fixes.
- Cons: Several $100s for all fixes. Anecdotal field experience suggests they help but it's far from certain.
- Firewall heat resistance. This thread examined different methods of improving the firewall's resistance to heat. I choose the intumescent paint, figuring it would provide a bit of safety and wasn't hard to do or work with subsequently.
- Pros: most methods are relatively cheap and not difficult to do before the engine is mounted, and will provide a few extra minutes of time to land in case of engine fire. No moving parts to fail.
- Cons: fairly awkward to perform on a finished airplane.
- Replace aluminum heater control box with stainless steel one. Vans supplies an aluminum heater control box which mounts on the engine side of the firewall. This would presumably fail quickly in an engine fire. Aircraft Spruce sells an identical unit made from stainless steel.
- Pros: corrects an obvious weak point in fire protection for little money and no extra effort while building.
- Cons: None to speak of.
- Fire suppression system. Available from Safecraft, and a thread here, these systems offer a chance to put out the dreaded engine fire.
- Pros: available under $500, probably not very difficult to add to finished airplane.
- Cons: cost/benefit may not be as effective as other measures for what is statistically a rare event. Adds weight.
- Air bag seat belts. Amsafe sells these, they are like car air bags but mounted in the seatbelt strap.
- Pros: like in cars, protect the head and upper body in a collision and can save lives. Perhaps not difficult to retrofit to flying aircraft.
- Cons: expensive (about $1500). They are not available for E/AB aircraft. There is a bicycling airbag helmet that looks interesting but is probably not useful for GA.
- Aircraft detection. Our Mark I eyeballs are far from perfect seeing other aircraft. Flight Following can help on cross countries, but what about local flying? Devices seem to fall into two categories: detecting other planes' transponders directly (e.g. Zaon), or using ADS-B In and Out.
- Pros: Portable transponder detectors are available and a few hundred dollars. Most people say they started seeing aircraft they never would have before.
- Cons: the ADS-B In gadgets provide a very poor picture of traffic, you must have Out to get the complete picture. No gadget detects 100% of traffic.
- Make other aircraft notice you. Could include day-glo orange paint schemes, etc. but I'll stick with wig-wag lights.
- Pros: If you're already installing lights for night flight (taxi/landing), there are several add-on gadgets that wig-wag the lights, even warm up HID lights, etc. Wig-wagging the front lights is very effective for being noticed in the traffic pattern. Not expensive to add.
- Cons: Reduces lamp life, especially HIDs. May cause clicking noise on the headsets if your wiring isn't fully up to par. Doesn't help for faster aircraft approaching from behind.
- In-flight weather. For decades there was only looking outside, talking to Flight Service, and HIWAS, but now graphical weather is available during flight. There are two methods: XM satellite broadcasts and ADS-B In.
- Pros: far better idea of weather nearby and along your cross country route. Portable gadgets of either type are not expensive.
- Cons: XM requires a paid subscription. ADS-B may not be available, especially in mountainous West. Weather is several minutes old.
- Guided descent systems. Much more than the "Nearest Airport" button on GPSs, these new systems calculate the best airport to land at, taking into account terrain, wind, and runway orientation, and your plane's glide performance. Xavion makes the software and provides a $99 iPad app which shows a series of floating "hoops" to fly through to the runway threshold. Vertical Power incorporates the software in their VP-400 unit which actually flies your auto-pilot equipped airplane to the runway.
- Pros. If you already have an iPad, very cheap assistance for a common accident source: VMC flight into IMC by an unskilled pilot. The VP solution could provide a way for a non-pilot passenger to land in the event of pilot incapacitation. Fairly easy to add the iPad version to existing aircraft.
- Cons: VP solution very costly and difficult to retrofit, works only for certain autopilots (not Dynon at this writing).
- Stall warning. Our RVs and many other E/AB airplanes provide no warning of approaching stall other than the inherent feel of the airplane. Active stall warning devices are available, many in the form of visual angle-of-attack indicators and audible warnings.
- Pros: warn of stall before it happens, alerting the distracted or unobserving pilot during critical turns in the pattern. Systems available that don't require a glass panel.
- Cons: separate systems pricey. All require permanent installation and calibration.
- Fuel flow and totalizers. Fuel gages are required in all aircraft but are notorious for poor accuracy. An inline fuel flow meter + totalizer can supplement the fuel gage with a running, instantaneous measure of fuel consumed.
- Pros: provides an independent measure of fuel consumption and interesting data such as instantaneous fuel consumption and miles per gallon.
- Cons: more expense and another gizmo to fail or leak in a critical aircraft component, fuel lines. Won't directly detect a leaky fuel tank, though a sudden discrepancy between fuel gage and totalizer might alert the pilot something is wrong.
(Continued)
__________________
Ralph Finch
RV-9A QB-SA
Davis, CA
Last edited by Buggsy2 : 11-14-2013 at 09:36 AM.
Reason: added wig-wag lights
|

08-11-2013, 06:28 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 565
|
|
(...continued)
- Replace mechanical fuel pump with 2nd electric pump.
- Pros: Mechanical pumps fail at higher rates than electric pumps [stats?].
- Cons: Expense and installation bother. I'm not familiar with this, is the replacement electric pump firewall-forward, or firewall-aft like the usual boost pump? The replacement pump is always on, so can a 2nd boost pump serve, or does it need to be special?
- Personal parachute.
- Pros: Not too costly, should work with any aircraft with a way of opening the door or canopy in flight. Required for aerobatics with passenger(s).
- Cons: may be uncomfortable, has to be put on and off each flight, not suitable for aircraft without jettison-able canopy or door. Exiting the aircraft, falling, and landing incur lots of additional risks.
- Ballistic parachute. Perhaps the ultimate safety measure.
- Pros: Potentially useful in all crises except engine fire. Easy to activate.
- Cons: Very costly. Difficult installation and probably very difficult to retrofit. I have the idea that statistically, BRS-equipped aircraft don't have a better accident or fatality rate than other aircraft of similar type; true?
- Other ideas: Carry a Personal Locator Beacon; wear flame retardant clothing; for the mandatory aircraft ELT, use a modern 406 MHz model with GPS.
Finally, one can always get additional training. Don't want a full IFR rating? Get some time with an instructor in actual IMC, practicing level flight, turns, climbs, and descents. Don't want to learn acro? Maybe just get unusual attitude training or a spin endorsement. Even a tail wheel endorsement, formation flying training or joining the FAA Wings program can improve safety proficiency in all aspects of flying.
I have or will use: extra firewall protection (intumescent paint), stainless steel heat control, the Anti-Splat fixes for the nose gear, ADS-B In/Out for traffic and weather, AOA indicator (these last two using Dynon Skyview), the Xavion iPad runway finder, fuel totalizer, and modern 406 MHz/GPS ELT. I'll seriously consider seatbelt airbags if they're available for RV aircraft [nope]. I also want to get actual IMC time and unusual attitude training, and got a tail wheel and spin endorsement years ago.
My hope with these extra safety measures is that they will reduce the chances of the statistically most common, or most catastrophic, accidents and events. The trick is to then not take more risks (like flying near thunderstorms, because now you can "see" the weather) just because you have the new gizmos and features.
__________________
Ralph Finch
RV-9A QB-SA
Davis, CA
Last edited by Buggsy2 : 08-13-2013 at 11:52 AM.
Reason: Added fuel pump item
|

08-11-2013, 07:19 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: George West, TX
Posts: 567
|
|
Very good analysis Ralph. I appreciate your hard work there.
Cheers,
__________________
Deal Fair
RV-4 (N34CB)
George West, TX (8T6)
|

08-12-2013, 04:11 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 531
|
|
Add in this list (not so much things to do the the RV itself) and you've got a pretty full list of things to make personal decisions on.
http://www.vansairforce.net/mytakeonflying.htm
__________________
-Rick Greer, VAF #2492
|

08-12-2013, 08:41 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Corvallis Oregon
Posts: 3,547
|
|
and
add.. delete the mechanical fuel pump
Delete: stall warning.. thats for student pilot in Cessnas... 
|

08-13-2013, 11:55 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 565
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankh
add.. delete the mechanical fuel pump
Delete: stall warning.. thats for student pilot in Cessnas... 
|
Haha! Well, I've heard the military aircraft always have an AOA indicator, if they can, why not our RVs?
I'm not familiar with ditching the pump, is the replacement electric pump firewall-forward, or firewall-aft like the usual boost pump? The replacement pump is always on, so can a standard 2nd boost pump serve, or does the replacement need to be special?
__________________
Ralph Finch
RV-9A QB-SA
Davis, CA
|

08-13-2013, 12:24 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 1,324
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buggsy2
Ballistic parachute. Perhaps the ultimate safety measure.
Pros: Potentially useful in all crises except engine fire. Easy to activate.
Cons: Very costly. Difficult installation and probably very difficult to retrofit. I have the idea that statistically, BRS-equipped aircraft don't have a better accident or fatality rate than other aircraft of similar type; true?
|
Yes true. In fact in some cases the Cirrus accident rate is worse than non-BRS aircraft. Reading Cirrus accident reports, I think that there is an underlying psychological issue here called risk homeostasis.
Risk homeostasis is the phenomenon whereby someone will assume more risk if he or she is aware of some sort of magic bullet as the ultimate backstop. I don't have a problem with the technology but I do have a real issue with the attitude that it seems to create.
John Clark ATP, CFI
FAAST Team Representative
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
|

08-13-2013, 01:06 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Corvallis Oregon
Posts: 3,547
|
|
Well
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buggsy2
Haha! Well, I've heard the military aircraft always have an AOA indicator, if they can, why not our RVs?
I'm not familiar with ditching the pump, is the replacement electric pump firewall-forward, or firewall-aft like the usual boost pump? The replacement pump is always on, so can a standard 2nd boost pump serve, or does the replacement need to be special?
|
Because your not landing it on a carrier deck thats too short at the best of times..
Mechanical fuel pumps are prone to Vapour lock ( this is the primary reason low wing certified A/C cannot get an STC to run auto fuel, because it vapour locks even easier than 100LL).. Mainly because they are foward of the firewall and bolted to the back of a hot engine.. sucking a high vapour pressure liquid (fuel) uphill.
The duel electric pumps go behind the firewall.. or in the wingroots.
Some form of electrical backup is required as you state.
You would need to check if the stanard cube pump will work by itself for the carbed version, probably will... Mine was fuel injected and as long as the pump has enough flow they are capable of making way more pressure than needed. This pressure is limited by a relief valve that flows back to the tank.
I have had teo airplanes set up this way with a combined total of about 1200 hours flight time.
Lots of posts on this subject and my system is detailed on VAF under my name
Frank
|

08-13-2013, 03:05 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Central IL
Posts: 5,516
|
|
Thanks for the well thought out listing, Ralph. Is there a list of root causes of accidents and injuries as a result of that can me mated to this list? ( I have not found one)
I have no documented data, but it seems (feels) like loss of power, fuel is one of the causes (not the true root causes however) for crash, or landing without power. It would be good to match (fuel system) recommendations to avoiding root causes, without creating new ones too!
Again, thanks, it is this kind of thinking and effort to change our mindset and decisions in building that we can use.
Added: I googled and searched for accidents for EAB - A VAFer posted that there were 28 RV accidents in 2008. 23 of them were loss of control, 10 in the landing T/O phase. I am happy I have transition training scheduled as I will end up a better builder than pilot if not careful and plan ahead. 20% of EAB accidents are under 40 hrs (flight time) , and 50% occur by ~140 hours. This makes the insurance more understandable.
__________________
Bill
RV-7
Lord Kelvin:
“I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind.”
Last edited by BillL : 08-13-2013 at 03:44 PM.
Reason: Better information.
|

08-16-2013, 09:33 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 976
|
|
As has been hinted above, each item in the list needs then to be "multiplied" by the number / probability of accidents it prevents.
The "firewall forward" fire has a great emphasis in your post, but a very rare event AFAIK? If the effort went into preventing the fire in the 1st place, might that not be better? Replace the lines more often, inspect more often, get a second view on the design / component types?
As you move to at the end of your post, the aircraft is not really the problem, it is the "stick seat interface" that needs making safer for maximum benefit
Technology rarely makes the safety enhancement it ought. BRS is a case in point. (E)GPWS has worked in the airline world, but then we see people here advocating how it "increases their SA" i.e. they intend to fly using it, rather than just using it as the last ditch "pull up" indicator.
Just my 2ps - sorry - 2c worth
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:11 AM.
|