VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-22-2013, 09:30 PM
roadrunner20's Avatar
roadrunner20 roadrunner20 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bay Pines, FL (based @ KCLW)
Posts: 1,955
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walt View Post
Yes that is the early version of the counter weight location, I have the same style on my 7.
The sn on the TKATC 7A is 70340.
Mine is 71234 and I have the newer version counter weight.
__________________
Danny "RoadRunner" Landry
Morphed RV7(formally 7A), N20DL, PnP Pilot
1190+ hours
2019 Donation Paid
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-22-2013, 10:05 PM
NASA515 NASA515 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Hansville, Washington
Posts: 536
Default

Do not count on the NTSB for anything these days. They are most interested in the Chairperson worrying about getting up in front of the cameras and engaging in immediate speculation. Read the Air Line Pilot Assn's Press Release on the Asiana SFO 777 crash.

Their reports on air carrier accidents is woefully slow - sometimes years and years in the release - and then ignoring some of the most blatant items that cry out for further investigation.

I am a Full Member of ISASI - the Intl Society of Air Safety Investigators. in one case, I (and my wife) were eyewitnesses to a fatal experimental aircraft accident that happened literally in front of our eyes and less than 200-300 feet away. I observed the entire sequence, from pilot pre-flight, to boarding, start-up, taxi-out and crash from alongside the runway. It was a classic departure stall/spin. I called the IIC (Investigator-in-Charge), a man who I had sat with at many dinners and meetings and left a message stating I was an eyewitness and could provide a report - a "qaulified" witness would be the appropriate term.

When he declined to return my call, I called again, and again. He never did make contact with me.

Thinking the manufacturer will contact, promote, and encourage the NTSB to do a thorough investigation is naive. It might happen. It could happen. In some cases. But, in MOST cases, manufacturers are more than happy to allow some of these phone call investigations to proceed in their slow and lackadaisical way, preferring to let sleeping dogs lie.


Bob Bogash
RV-12
N737G

Last edited by rv7boy : 09-22-2013 at 10:12 PM. Reason: DR bashing
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-22-2013, 10:57 PM
Andrew M's Avatar
Andrew M Andrew M is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Secluded Lake,Alaska (AK49)
Posts: 359
Default Inspection

[quote=

Again, even though I built it, I would gladly accept any suggestions from a more qualified repairman or more experienced builder...

[/QUOTE]

I am still building, so service issues for this aircraft can be better addressed by others. What I have to offer is general in nature, base on 25+ years of structures maintenance.

Inspect visually, audibly, and by feel for security by loading and operating the system. Example, get someone in the cockpit to operate the controls slowly while you place a load with open palms on the flight control. Go from stop to stop while loading in both directions. Listen for pops or clunks, look for oil canning, feel for roughness or rubbing. Removing the middle bolt and looking for relative motion at that hole while moving the control will show hinge alignment.
The stabilizers (or any rigid attachment) can be checked by shaking with one hand, and placing a finger on the joint with the other to feel for relative motion. (Listen and look to!)

When cracks start, it is usually the last fastener at a cross section change, or out of a bend at the end of a piece. Determining the significance of any crack can be done by imagining the load the part carries. A small crack coming out of a bend in the last rib is likely a stress relief of a part that didn't quite fit right and can be stop drilled once. Small smooth skin dents or small holes a fastener diameter or two away from any underlying structure can be considered negligible. Dents that show a ridge or crease should be considered a crack. Any hinge attach, component attach or spar defect needs to be addressed before further flight.

This sums up what I have read in every production structural repair manual I have read that has been published since the 1950's.

If anyone can tell me how to inspect by taste or smell, that would be great
__________________
Andrew Miller
A&P, IA
-9 empennage
Wings arrived 12 JAN 13
https://plus.google.com/photos/11360...J-TuJPsmOONzQE
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-22-2013, 11:16 PM
rvbuilder2002's Avatar
rvbuilder2002 rvbuilder2002 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
Default

Even if Van's did encourage the NTSB to do a thorough investigation, I am not sure it would make a bit of difference regarding the outcome. The NTSB is going to do what ever they want. I admit that there seems to be a variation in the amount of investigative effort that is invested, from one accident to another. It may be based on what region it occurred (same as differences with dealing with the FAA).

Regardless the reason, I think it unfair to characterize that all gen. av. accidents get poorly investigated is false.
HERE is just one example. I wont go into detail (you can read it yourselves) but it was a rather in depth investigation because there was no clear explanation for why it should have happened. Van's was asked to be involved (as we sometimes are... BTW, anyone (engine & avionics mfr's, etc.) involved in assisting with an investigation signs a nondisclosure agreement with the NTSB). Bottom line, the investigation uncovered a very plausible explanation for the accident. Do they always? No, but I think they should be allowed a chance to do so. When the final report on this unfortunate accident comes out, who knows, we may all be surprised at the determination.

BTW, the difference in elevator counterbalance weights was a simple design change that allowed a reduction in the amount of balance weight that had to be used (removes weight from the far aft of the aircraft and reduces overall empty weight, both good things from a designer perspective).
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.

Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-23-2013, 12:03 AM
rv8ch's Avatar
rv8ch rv8ch is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: LSGY
Posts: 3,198
Default NTSB

Quote:
Originally Posted by NASA515 View Post
...I am a Full Member of ISASI - the Intl Society of Air Safety Investigators. in one case, I (and my wife) were eyewitnesses to a fatal experimental aircraft accident that happened literally in front of our eyes and less than 200-300 feet away. I observed the entire sequence, from pilot pre-flight, to boarding, start-up, taxi-out and crash from alongside the runway. It was a classic departure stall/spin. I called the IIC (Investigator-in-Charge), a man who I had sat with at many dinners and meetings and left a message stating I was an eyewitness and could provide a report - a "qaulified" witness would be the appropriate term.

When he declined to return my call, I called again, and again. He never did make contact with me. ...
Hi Bob, It would be interesting to know if you feel that the final report missed something that you could have contributed.
__________________
Mickey Coggins
http://rv8.ch
"Hello, world!"
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-23-2013, 12:06 AM
rv8ch's Avatar
rv8ch rv8ch is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: LSGY
Posts: 3,198
Default External force during preflight

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew M View Post
... Inspect visually, audibly, and by feel for security by loading and operating the system. Example, get someone in the cockpit to operate the controls slowly while you place a load with open palms on the flight control. Go from stop to stop while loading in both directions. Listen for pops or clunks, look for oil canning, feel for roughness or rubbing. ...
I love this idea. It can also give the GIB something useful to do during the preflight.
__________________
Mickey Coggins
http://rv8.ch
"Hello, world!"
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-23-2013, 02:01 AM
Andy Hill's Avatar
Andy Hill Andy Hill is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 976
Default

sailvi767 & NASA515 - your posts were what I was thinking.

Re:
Quote:
Thinking the manufacturer will contact, promote, and encourage the NTSB to do a thorough investigation is naive. It might happen. It could happen. In some cases. But, in MOST cases, manufacturers are more than happy to allow some of these phone call investigations to proceed in their slow and lackadaisical way, preferring to let sleeping dogs lie.
I would hope Vans would co-operate, even more, provide resources, and I believe has a history of doing so. However, bottom line is they are a business, with Insurance & Liability concerns, and so even if individuals within Vans would wish to be open, honest and inquisitive, they may be prevented from doing so. Vans took a fairly "robust" attitude to the A model nosewheel issues for instance. Note from the Link above, Garmin at some point refused to assist the NTSB further...

What I was hinting towards, and your posts further, was based on:
Quote:
I am a Full Member of ISASI - the Intl Society of Air Safety Investigators
Quote:
As a result most RV investigations end up being a minimal effort to clear that accident. In most cases there is very little actual investigation and the final report relies on phone conversations with witnesses ect... More often then not they never even visit the accident site. They simply have higher priority accidents on their plate.
and I stated above why the "Experimental" category probably does not help in this regard when there is actually a widespread common design worldwide.

Is there scope for some sort of "organisation", of competent / qualified / experienced individuals in the RV / Experimental sphere to assist the NTSB i.e. go further than the NTSB are able to? Such a body would need to be discrete (i.e. the opposite of the 'Speculation' thread), self funded (EAA?), comply with non-disclosure.

The RV-12 fatality in Aus on a 1st flight had some similar comments - due to the category apparently it would not be formally investigated, but IIRC it was stated a 3rd party body would probably ensure some form of competent investigation would result?
__________________
Andy & Ellie Hill
RV-8 G-HILZ
RV-3B G-HILI very slow build
RV8tors
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-23-2013, 02:54 AM
savas savas is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South Africa
Posts: 14
Default

i would imagine, that most RV's , are low time at this stage, even though there are 1000's flying all over the world.
there are often SB's etc on TCA, even after decades of use, so maybe there needs to be some serious look by VAns into this item, and make a decision.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-23-2013, 02:59 AM
rhill rhill is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Valley Forge, Pa
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002 View Post
BTW, the difference in elevator counterbalance weights was a simple design change that allowed a reduction in the amount of balance weight that had to be used (removes weight from the far aft of the aircraft and reduces overall empty weight, both good things from a designer perspective).
If I may ask,when did this change occur? Outside of the arm and glass pieces,what other parts are involved? As a light engine/prop 7a builder any weight off the tail is a good thing especially if doubler or backing plates are found to be needed.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-23-2013, 06:16 AM
Low Pass's Avatar
Low Pass Low Pass is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,012
Default

I totally disagree with this tone that Van's shys away from thorough investigation of accidents that have design or structural implication.

And further, what federal government entity doesn't spend more time - emphasis on camera face presence - on the incidents that make the mainstream media headline. Par for the course in a society that fully expects modern technology to provide zero risk, and a government that unrealistically panders to this fantasy.

Last, many won't get this one, but I think it's perfectly appropriate for the NTSB to take a minimal approach to exp-ab incidents. The further government agencies dig into our life, the more they will want to control us. I will gladly accept an aviation life without their added input on aircraft accidents in my exp-ab world. We do just fine on our own. I would argue that the collective intellect on the subject reading and posting in this board far exceeds that brought to bear by all of the NTSB.

Last edited by Low Pass : 09-23-2013 at 06:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:12 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.