VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.






VAF on Twitter:
@VansAirForceNet

  #11  
Old 11-13-2022, 09:05 AM
Marc Bourget Marc Bourget is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Stockton, California
Posts: 384
Default

Indawarrior said: "This has turned into a Jan bashing. Unfairly, I think."

So, virtue, character and personal responsibility are rationalized away because the perpetrator's feelings may be hurt?

Jan put himself in this position. Back in '09, IIRC, he was representing his product was manufactured according to "accepted industry standards." * He stopped using such terminology but may have not stopped the behavior.

The consequences to victims and their families are greater by several orders of magnitude than the burden of corrective action to Jan.

Have we abandoned the expectation of holding one responsible for making a wrong thing right?

My opinion from back then has not waivered

* placed in quotes for emphasis - from his website but may have been - acceptable or similar
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-13-2022, 09:20 AM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 6,403
Default

Companies with good morals issue a SB and offer free replacement parts to remedy the problem to their affected customers.

This demonstrates they actually care about their customers more than money.

Denying there is a problem and blaming the customer doesn't help your reputation.

Fess up, fix it, move on.
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, SDS EFI, Marcotte M-300, IVO, Shorai- RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW since 2003- 460.7 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiy...g2GvQfelECCGoQ


Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-13-2022, 09:23 AM
rocketman1988 rocketman1988 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sunman, IN
Posts: 3,187
Default ...and

"...Almost no design or product is perfect first time around..."

There is no such thing as a perfect design; there has never been and will never be a perfect design.
__________________
Bob
EAA Tech Counselor
Aerospace Engineer '88

RV-10-ER
N464RL
In Paint at Evoke!
Garmin G3X-T, Barrett EFII S32, CAI, MTV-9B

Dues+ Paid 2022,...Thanks DR+
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-13-2022, 10:42 AM
Marc Bourget Marc Bourget is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Stockton, California
Posts: 384
Default

Rocketman,

The fact that there is no such thing as a perfect design while an accurate observation, does not "enable" substandard effort or performance.

Jan embarked on a project to provide a man - usable product.

As a reasonable man, he had the responsibility and the moral obligation to expend best efforts to produce a "man-rated" product. He did not and, in the past, marketed a substandard design claiming it to be made "according to industry standards." I suspect the marketing has changed but the behavior has remained the same.

I have personal experience observing the impact on an ethical man the consequences of his missing a design item that resulted in a fatality. He explained that nothing in his experience alerted him to the possibility of a problem. He spent a large portion of his assets in investigating and correcting the problem.

Fixing the problem didn't ease the conscience of this ethical, moral man.

In this case, a reasonable testing period should have given evidence of the weakness of the PSRU design. IMHO, if a "proper" designed part would have cost $100 more at the time, and $150 now, AT A MINIMUM, Jan should absorb the difference and offer a quality replacement at $50 off.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-13-2022, 10:54 AM
KeithO KeithO is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Jackson,MI
Posts: 116
Default

I am working with the Viking 110 owners who utilize the 708HU engine controller, which Jan claims is responsible for all the failures. The amazing thing is that since 2014 there has not been a single engine problem in that entire fleet. There were probably 30-40 owners who went with this engine controller when Jan refused to make changes to the controller provided which the owners felt rendered their engines non airworthy at the time.

I am working on a design proposal for a new gearbox back plate and a new bracket for the underside of the block (in the installed position) which provides a 5th attachment point for the gearbox. The centering bushing and the flexible damper will also be of a new design, although it will be compatible with the existing drive flange geometry.

The existing 4 post mounting of the gearbox will be replaced with a 1 piece casting that uses these 4 attachment points but would obviously be stiffer in the radial direction given it is a single piece. This piece could be retrofitted to any 110 gearbox original or updated, but this change alone will not solve the root cause. The extra gearbox mount point will be required.

I honestly hadn't expected Jan to make any commitment to do anything, so we will observe what emerges in December as he says. If his proposal looks good, then we can go with that. If not we will be making parts next year and doing ground testing using Mark Hubelbanks engine that has been removed from his airframe. Since his gearbox failure his wife has basically refused to get back in the airplane until it has a different powerplant, so that ship has sailed.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-13-2022, 11:59 AM
Piper J3's Avatar
Piper J3 Piper J3 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Hinckley, Ohio
Posts: 2,818
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithO View Post
If not we will be making parts next year and doing ground testing using Mark Hubelbanks engine that has been removed from his airframe. Since his gearbox failure his wife has basically refused to get back in the airplane until it has a different powerplant, so that ship has sailed.
I understand ground testing... but isn't testing in turbulent air required with gyroscopic precession and other dynamic factors?
__________________
-
Jim Stricker - EAA #499867
PPL/ASEL 1970 - Sport Pilot since 2007
80 hrs Flying Aeronca Chief 11AC N86203
1130 hrs Flying 46 Piper J-3 Cub N6841H
Bought Flying RV-12 #120058 Oct 2015 with 48TT - Hobbs now 830

LSRM-A Certificate 2016 for RV-12 N633CM
Special Thanks... EJ Trucks - USN Crew Chief A-4 Skyhawk
MJ Stricker (Father - CFI) - USAAF 1st Lt. Captain B-17H
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-13-2022, 04:29 PM
KeithO KeithO is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Jackson,MI
Posts: 116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piper J3 View Post
I understand ground testing... but isn't testing in turbulent air required with gyroscopic precession and other dynamic factors?
Of course it will be flown. But what do you do before you fly it ? The first thing we will do is measure the deflection of the gearbox input shaft relative to the crank with the standard gearbox and mount for increasing amounts of bending moment applied to the prop flange in several different radial directions. This would then be repeated after making the changes to the mount and adding the new gearbox support point on the opposite side of the crank centerline. So we should have definitive answers regarding the change in stiffness before to after.

Since my plan is to replace the guibo with a custom part using PU bushings and without cordage and a new permanent guide bushing (steel with glacier bushing insert and welded to the flywheel side drive hub, with a pilot for centering on the crankshaft), I do think there should be some hours put on the assembly in ground testing to make sure the PU bushings hold up, that heat dissipation is OK (for that we could try to find a resonant point near idle that really works the flexible coupling). We can also check if we get any fretting problems between the gearbox input shaft and the new guide bushing. I was going to use high pressure grease in that joint like copperslip to help prevent that problem but this is all safe work that can be done on the ground. I think everyone expects that TV issues are usually not encountered at higher power/RPM.

We dont expect problems with the gearbox internals since they seem to have held up well with no issues we are aware of. Again, having said that, since I am qualified in all 4 NDT disciplines to level 2, at the start of this exercise I will be dye penetrant inspecting all the parts, including the housing, to see if we discover any additional fatigue cracks that we are simply not aware of. If we have any new discoveries we will have to take that into account and may yet be needing even more new parts. We shall see.

Finally we will be looking for a test pilot after we have got that far, someone who flys more hours than average. We would potentially want to inspect the drive flanges which so far have been the point of failure at 50 hour intervals to confirm absence of fatigue cracking. If the metallurgical analysis of the existing drive flanges indicates embrittlement due to the welding process used for the pins, we may need new parts and have them heat treated to normalize them to prevent this problem before we start. Pending what the metallurgist says when he looks at the parts that cracked all the way through. Any part like this should be ductile and not show brittle fractures.

Last edited by KeithO : 11-13-2022 at 04:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-13-2022, 05:04 PM
rocketman1988 rocketman1988 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sunman, IN
Posts: 3,187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Bourget View Post
Rocketman,

The fact that there is no such thing as a perfect design while an accurate observation, does not "enable" substandard effort or performance.

Jan embarked on a project to provide a man - usable product.

As a reasonable man, he had the responsibility and the moral obligation to expend best efforts to produce a "man-rated" product. He did not and, in the past, marketed a substandard design claiming it to be made "according to industry standards." I suspect the marketing has changed but the behavior has remained the same.

I have personal experience observing the impact on an ethical man the consequences of his missing a design item that resulted in a fatality. He explained that nothing in his experience alerted him to the possibility of a problem. He spent a large portion of his assets in investigating and correcting the problem.

Fixing the problem didn't ease the conscience of this ethical, moral man.

In this case, a reasonable testing period should have given evidence of the weakness of the PSRU design. IMHO, if a "proper" designed part would have cost $100 more at the time, and $150 now, AT A MINIMUM, Jan should absorb the difference and offer a quality replacement at $50 off.

I cannot comment on Jan nor the engine in question as I have no background or experience with either.

That said, my comment stems from an engineering perspective; a perfect system cannot be designed or built. Anyone who claims they have done it is not being realistic.

Yes, I agree that in business there is a responsibility to the customer…
__________________
Bob
EAA Tech Counselor
Aerospace Engineer '88

RV-10-ER
N464RL
In Paint at Evoke!
Garmin G3X-T, Barrett EFII S32, CAI, MTV-9B

Dues+ Paid 2022,...Thanks DR+
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-13-2022, 05:21 PM
KeithO KeithO is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Jackson,MI
Posts: 116
Default

Bob, all of these engines are long out of warranty and I dont think that at this point anyone would realistically expect any sort of "free" solution to the problems. But if a solution is made available that one could consider modest in cost relative to the cost of re-powering, there will be many people who would choose to use it.

If I take my Jabiru 3300 gen 2 engine. It has a theoretical top overhaul limitation at 1000 hours that will cost $7500 (I have a quote from the folks at Arion). Now I have only 700 hours on my engine and it has had strong blowby and oil consumption since a little over 500 hours. If I go ahead and have the work done, the top overhaul is not going to mitigate in any way the series of issues that this engine suffers from. The head bolts will still need to be torqued at every oil change interval of 25 hours. The case studs will still be of the "known to be too weak" original small diameter and could yield and could result in fretting of the case halves and out of round wear of the main bearings.

To get the known issues addressed I have to spend more than the $7500 quoted to get the cases machined for the bigger studs and still the yielding of the head bolts will continue because there is no solution for it. The wear on the cam and flat cam followers will also continue, inspect and repair as necessary as it comes up. And best of all, the high temperature at which this engine operates will continue to cause rapid sludge buildup on the pistons and I can expect that in another 600-700 hours I will have the same blowby and oil consumption issues as I have now.

I would have to be stupid to accept this maintenance path and I wont. My Lightning will be getting a Honda engine and I can forget about all these problems and someone else can carry on with the Jab 3300. So I agree that there is no perfect engine, yet somehow I feel that all of these manufacturers are being held to a very low standard. We are well aware of the draconian restrictions the Jabiru folks are under in Australia and possibly New Zealand, yet despite the fact that our engines come out the very same factory, we in the US pretend that none of it applies to us because it has been sold in a different jurisdiction.

Last edited by KeithO : 11-13-2022 at 05:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-13-2022, 08:11 PM
KeithO KeithO is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Jackson,MI
Posts: 116
Default

Bob, many years ago I sat in front of a hiring panel trying to get a job at Volkswagen. One of the questions they asked me is "how do you define quality?" My answer was that "a product exhibits quality when it meets the customers expectations". Apparently that was the best answer they had heard all day.... The expectations of a soccer mom, or someone who drives in a sporty way or a professional rally driver, or a business executive taking a client somewhere are obviously not the same.

I would therefore say that in the real world, perfect does not mean zero defect. It means meeting the expectations of the customers. No one has an infinite amount of money to spend or time to wait for the development to be completed. No car that is launched is perfect either, but the manufacturer has the opportunity to keep refining the product as it is in production to address unforseen issues. The Ford Focus, which today has a very good reliability record, had a very bad launch when the spark plugs specified caused a considerable amount of misfiring, so bad in fact that a large % of the catalytic converters were destroyed within the first few months of service. Because of the precious metal loading this was a very expensive warranty for Ford, several hundred $ per car. Once the spark plug problem was identified the issue went away entirely and following a general upgrade on materials used for the exhaust system became a very reliable car that they sold lots of. Especially once they introduced the variable nozzle turbo diesel that was simply a rocket (sorry it wasn't sold in the US)...

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketman1988 View Post
I cannot comment on Jan nor the engine in question as I have no background or experience with either.

That said, my comment stems from an engineering perspective; a perfect system cannot be designed or built. Anyone who claims they have done it is not being realistic.

Yes, I agree that in business there is a responsibility to the customer…
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 10:30 PM.


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.