|
-
POSTING RULES

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

06-24-2014, 07:40 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: SC
Posts: 12,887
|
|
Education
After reading some of the comments that this thread have generated, I am driven to make the following comments. These are not directed towards any individual or specific comment.
As a forum group, are we not here to learn? If we don't post these types of things and allow people to comment (good and bad) how can any of us understand what is "correct" and "incorrect", "good" or "bad", "acceptable" or "unacceptable"?
Is there more than one way to install a fuel injection system? Yes, the example at the start of this thread is one. There are probably other installations that are working fine, in the environment they operate. However, move the plane to the desert Southwest or the upper Midwest and things may change rather drastically.
There are "standard" practices that people use or avoid. Some work, heck all might work, but some won't and I believe most of us would rather be on the side of what works all the time in all conditions.
If we can't post these types of safety of flight issues (and having your engine die when you turn off the boost pump is a safety of flight issue) and allow for an unobstructed exchange of information, then we might as well shut the forum down as it will only post what is politically correct and deemed acceptable by the moderators (who have a tough enough job already).
(One last comment, the owner of this plane gave me his permission to post those pictures and is following this thread. He is new to the Experimental world and this has been a learning experience for him. One of his comments has been that he is thrilled to find a bunch of people who are willing to pitch in and help a stranger. As for the rest of his aircraft, it appeared to be a high quality build with just some issues in the engine installation, which have been addressed.)
__________________
Bill R.
RV-9 (Yes, it's a dragon tail)
O-360 w/ dual P-mags
Build the plane you want, not the plane others want you to build!
SC86 - Easley, SC
www.repucci.com/bill/baf.html
|

06-24-2014, 07:44 PM
|
|
unqualified unfluencer
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Highland Village, TX
Posts: 4,088
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by N941WR
After reading some ....snip
|
Great comments, Bill !!!!! Well said.
__________________
Doug Reeves (your host) - Full time: VansAirForce.net since '07 (started it in '96).
- Part time: Supporting Crew Member CAE Embraer Phenom 300 (E55P) @ KDFW.
- Occasionally: Contract pilot (resume).
|

06-24-2014, 10:18 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Tuttle, Oklahoma
Posts: 2,563
|
|
This is my last comment on this thread.
I am in no way saying the information discussed is not of value. My issue has nothing to do with providing information for the uninitiated and I believe I already said as much.
Bill, you keep referring to the current owner of this airplane and how any comments are not directed toward him. I do not contest that idea, but my point was that the comments ARE directed toward the builder. Your original post eluded to the fact that this is that builder's 14th build. Others have posted that is a concern as well. I am saying that what is happening on this thread is a 'can you believe what this guy did' bashing contest! You even start the ball rolling by the thread's title: HOW MANY ISSUES CAN YOU FIND!
Why post on a public forum such things without addressing those concerns with the builder first? Since you are telling us information concerning the number of airplanes this builder has built prior to this one I cannot help but infer from your comments that at least you know who that builder is. I would expect common courtesy would dictate discussing the concerns you originally had with this build with him before you go using his build shortcommings as a 'TEACHING MOMENT'.
If this were my plane you posted pictures of without talking to me FIRST, I would take great offense at that action and consider it very insulting. On the other hand if you were to come to me in person and discuss the issues you saw with me, then asked for my permission to post what you found wrong with my build on a public forum in order to educate the uninitiated, I would be much less insulted by that and more inclined to be willing to contribute to the education of others. However, starting the dialog by making it a contest for others to nit pick what they see wrong in a handful of pictures is definitely not taking the high road.
I am finished commenting on this thread. Everyone here can now bash anything I have said. It is irrelevant to me if you do so. It is apparent that many on here know better what is needed in order to educate others than do I, so I bow out of the conversation.
Last edited by RVbySDI : 06-25-2014 at 08:12 AM.
|

06-25-2014, 01:02 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oakland CA
Posts: 771
|
|
I always appreciate other sets of eyes looking for "issues" on my plane and having been invited to do so on this example I would also offer that it appears that the ignition leads are the automotive type that come with electronic ignitions and the leads appear to be tie wrapped together. There should be stand-offs keeping the wires apart from each other and away from any metal they could arc to. This is only if they are indeed un-shielded high voltage wires.
__________________
All Best
Jeremy Constant
RV7A "Stella Luna" ECI IO-360 WW200RV Pmags 360hrs
VAF 2019 paid plus some for those who can't
|

06-25-2014, 05:51 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: MKE
Posts: 1,519
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RVbySDI
This is my last comment on this thread.
|
This is my first comment on this thread, and I'm going to disagree with you. All of your points are valid and I would agree with you if this were a 1st time builder flying behind their own workmanship. The fact that this is a person who built this airplane to sell to another (why else would one have built 14 RVs) raises the bar to another level. Much like the FAA which places tighter reigns on commercial operations (maintenance, medical certification, inspections, etc...) I think we in the community need to hold "hired guns" to a higher standard.
While I respect Bill's decision not to name the builder, I disagree with it. I would name him publicly and advise anyone who bought one of his airplanes (at least 13 we know of) to take a close look under the hood for the same issues seen here. As others have pointed out, these are not just cosmetic issues but safety of flight issues, and safety concerns are not to be handled with kid gloves.
__________________
Jeff Point
RV-6, RLU-1 built & flying
Tech Counselor, Flight Advisor & President, EAA Chapter 18
Milwaukee
|

06-25-2014, 08:21 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 1,095
|
|
Jeff, you're speculating as to the builder's intent. You don't know what his motivation was for building 14 airplanes. You don't know if they were all different, and he was simply trying something new.
I agree with having a factual dialogue about finding problems and fixing them...and that's what Steve and a couple others have said here, as well. The issue I have is the way it's being communicated. I seriously doubt that ANY of those that have "bashed" the builder have a perfectly built airplane, and if you posted a picture on this forum of one of their problems and said "can you believe he did it THIS way??"...that guy would be pissed. If not, well, I'd be really surprised.
__________________
Sonny W
Boise, Idaho
RV-7A Flying!
|

06-25-2014, 08:22 AM
|
|
|
I agree
With sprucemoose. I didn't think of the builder acting like a manufacturer.
If that is the case his/her identity should be revealed.
Should we stop airworthiness directives because they may hurt Cessna's feelings?
Last edited by paul mosher : 06-25-2014 at 08:25 AM.
|

06-25-2014, 08:40 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: MKE
Posts: 1,519
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostpilot28
Jeff, you're speculating as to the builder's intent. You don't know what his motivation was for building 14 airplanes. You don't know if they were all different, and he was simply trying something new.
|
I'm drawing the only reasonable conclusion from the limited facts presented. The legality/ propriety of hired guns is another debate for another thread. Frankly the builder's intent is irrelevant to this discussion; if he is foisting unairworthy aircraft on an unsuspecting buying public it matters little whether the intent was profit or fun.
__________________
Jeff Point
RV-6, RLU-1 built & flying
Tech Counselor, Flight Advisor & President, EAA Chapter 18
Milwaukee
|

06-25-2014, 09:05 AM
|
|
|
builder
The guy that owns the airplanes wished to show the photos. The builder no longer owns the airplane and has no voice in the matter unless the owner has agreed to some sort of non disclosure agreement.
How many "**** previous owner" posts have there been on this site? Haven't heard any complaints about them.
|

06-25-2014, 09:18 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Garden City Texas
Posts: 878
|
|
Well at least we know the boost pump was effective combating the vapor lock. There is a bright side to everything.
|
| 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 03:14 AM.
|