Link to news in portuguese
http://g1.globo.com/goias/noticia/2...anapolis-go-e-retirada-para-investigacao.html
http://g1.globo.com/goias/noticia/2...anapolis-go-e-retirada-para-investigacao.html
Best I can deduct, that makes four now.
Guys, it is a PRIORITY of mine to:
A) Personally check the door, and,
B) Ensure that the trim is set for takeoff. Both critical in a -10.
Best,
Not owning a 10, and not having flown in one, what is causing the doors to come apart? Obviously the doors "cant" be latched and locked. Is this something that we need to look at for a updated design?
Tom
Not owning a 10, and not having flown in one, what is causing the doors to come apart? Obviously the doors "cant" be latched and locked. Is this something that we need to look at for a updated design?
Tom
When the doors are properly latched they will not open in flight. I had an 80 lb dog test it and when my plane exploded the windows blew out but I still had to open the door to get out.
...and when my plane exploded...
It's possible to improperly latch the door. I did it while we were still building so the only damage was to the paint. The rear pin actuated outside the door, likely because we were fitting the weather stripping.Not owning a 10, and not having flown in one, what is causing the doors to come apart? Obviously the doors "cant" be latched and locked. Is this something that we need to look at for a updated design?
Tom
You could just stay on the ground and eliminate all the risk.
You are free to design a front hinged door if it makes you feel comfortable,
just don't place that burden on Van.
As far as I know, no injuries have resulted from the loss of a door on an RV-10 and the resulting damage can be repaired. Some bruised egos I would assume.
So far the greatest cause of damage and accidents in RV-10s has been fuel.
I suppose you are going to demand that Van design the fuel out of the system.
Let's keep this polite and on topic.
When a builder made poorly thought out modifications on his -10, Van's addressed those problems directly and from an engineering standpoint.
Similarly, the doors are an engineering problem that can be solved. Extra latches, warning lights, etc. are band-aids which don't address the underlying problem with the -10's doors.
Opinion here: A top hinged door is an accident waiting to happen on a 200 mph airplane. When it pops open, there is a very high chance that it will depart the aircraft, creating the possibility of damaging the empennage, which could turn into a very serious event. Front hinged doors may swing open if not properly latched, but they rarely (never?) depart the aircraft...
...As far as I know, no injuries have resulted from the loss of a door on an RV-10 and the resulting damage can be repaired. Some bruised egos I would assume...
When my cabin was filled with smoke I knew I could open the door and let it fly away. That gave me a clear view to my left and allowed me to find a site to land. In a front hinged door I would be in a bigger trouble....
For security I did install Sean's door latch kit.
There were some pictures of an RV-10 that lost the right door. I can no longer find the pictures as they appear to have been taken down.
The door hit the HS, bent it pretty good, and twisted the tail cone. Pretty significant damage and the pilot was lucky to land the aircraft. (I still wonder how it didn?t jam the elevator.)
I would think twice about opening the door inflight and would take every precaution to avoid that scenario.
Here is the thread regarding thet incident of the door hitting the tail.
Here is the NTSB report.
This is speculation, as you pointed out.If I recall correctly, there was some information that led some to believe that the airplane you are talking about, had suffered a VERY hard landing at some time prior to the door leaving. Hard enough to have popped empennage rivets and caused some deformation. I seem to remember some speculation that this hard landing and resulting bending of metal may have had some bearing on the door leaving the airplane. All speculation, of course, but I do remember some respected members of this forum having knowledge of the incident...
I agree, Bill. It was pretty obvious that the door damaged the tail feathers. However, as I said, there was some information out there at the time, that the airplane had had an extremely hard landing at some point prior to the door departure. It has been a while back, but if I remember correctly, there was some damage to the gear/wheel pants as well as some evidence of stress where the cabin top meets the tailcone. Then again, my memory ain't what it used to be.This is speculation, as you pointed out.
The aircraft in question had the tail cone twisted a significant amount. A hard landing would most likely bend the tail cone down and if he struck the tail, it would bend up, not twist it. In addition, any landing hard enough to damage the tail cone would have also damaged the landing gear.
If I remember the pictures correctly, it was pretty obvious that the door caused the damage.
He reported that a serial number [was] found on the door of the aircraft. From it, the origin of the plane will be investigated.
I am pretty sure that the guide blocks supplied in RV-10 finish kits are now made of Delrin (and I believe they have been for a couple of years).
I will not enter an argument of whether the RV-10 should have a different door design or not, but will suggest that at some point a pilot needs to take responsibility for his/her actions while flying an airplane.
Check lists are for helping us overcome our nature of not being perfect.
If we should redesign the door system on an RV-10 because of the high likelihood that there will always be pilots that will take-off without a door being properly latched...
Then we should also redesign the fuel system for all RV models (except the fuselage tank RV-3's) so that it is not possible for a pilot to take-off with an empty (or nearly so) tank selected or with the selector in the off position...
And, we should redesign the trim systems so that you can't start the engine without properly setting the pitch trim for take-off...
And, we should.... well, you get the idea.
I am not at all saying that improvements should not be made if safety of flight issues are discovered (which has been done countless times with different RV models over the years), but there is a practical limit to that.
At some point, the pilot has to get serious about his/her level of responsibility for completing a safe flight, when flying an airplane.
Then why did Vans try to fix it? That goes against Vans making a Service Bulletin that "fixes" the problem. Then when they do, they make a two handed operation.