VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

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

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-10
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 01-16-2010, 01:20 PM
Strasnuts Strasnuts is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 554
Default Door Latch ideas

Here is a couple of ideas for all the engineers out there that want to change the latch. After sitting in Scotts' airplane I came to the conclusion it wasn't needed but I personally think this is way better than the S.B. or B.S?

I know there are tons of versions of this idea it's just to keep everyone thinking of a better solution if it's going to be mandatory.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqOtd-lEQfU
__________________
A&P RV-10 Flying 1000+ hours
SuperSTOL Flying 170 hours
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-16-2010, 01:34 PM
Phil's Avatar
Phil Phil is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 1,658
Default

Unlike the others, I disagree Scott.

[RANT]

We all want to Bravo and moan because Van's won't acknowledge or fix a known issue. Then when they do come out and do something about it, we want to Bravo and moan some more because it's either 'ugly', 'lousy', or 'too draggy' (that's a dime size piece), or 'someone on the outside needs to know how to open it', or 'there's no hard points', or 'what are we going to do in a fire' (unlatch it), or whatever.

Just using a little common sense can go a long ways in the cockpit, I agree.

But let's also use a little common sense in recognizing our own tendencies as RV-10 drivers.

Let's just look at our own history and see where we screw up time and time again.

1) We've lost at least 3 doors that I know of. I'm sure there are more...
2) We've had dozens of close calls where someone fortunately discovered a door issue before takeoff.

Sum it all up and we've been exposed to door pop-off's dozens and maybe even hundreds of times across the fleet.

How many times has someone needed to be rescued from a fire? None.

How many crashes have resulted in someone needing to be rescued on the ground? None. They never made it that far.

Ladies and gentlemen, we're chasing the wrong tail!! We're all worried about avoiding #1, but we're stepping into #2 because "we do our checks". It's important to continue with those checks, but we've also proven time and time again that humans make mistakes all the time. If you don't think you've made a mistake flying your airplane, then it either doesn't fly or your a statistic waiting for your moment in the sunshine.

As RV-10 drivers our risk is a door falling off; not a ground rescue. I'm not saying that a ground rescue will never happen, but look back on our own history and tell me what the odds say??? The odds say we're more likely to lose many more doors before we even have to worry about a single ground rescue.

It's okay to be critical of the design, that's fine. But all this whining is killing me, especially after Van's did what we asked. They acknowledged and addressed the problem.

If we want something more elegant or something that suites our own personal tastes, then we need build it. It's an experimental airplane.

[/RANT]

Phil

Last edited by Phil : 01-16-2010 at 10:08 PM. Reason: Added some missing words.... RANT mode seems to generate incompete sentences.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-16-2010, 01:37 PM
Phil's Avatar
Phil Phil is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 1,658
Default

Nice job, Sean...

That's what I'm talking about. Ideas!!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-16-2010, 01:41 PM
ScottSchmidt's Avatar
ScottSchmidt ScottSchmidt is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post
Unlike the others, I disagree Scott.

[RANT]

It's okay to be critical of the design, that's fine. But all this whining is killing me, especially after Van's did what we asked. They addressed the problem.

If we want something more elegant or something that suites own personal tastes, then we need build it. It's an experimental airplane.

[/RANT]

Phil
Who asked??? I don't know of anyone who asked and I wish I could have been involved.

I agree that we can add this device or any other device.
Just look at all the planes that are using different handles and pin blocks. I would say more than 50% of the RV-10's flying have something "not stock" on their doors. My doors are 100% stock and 100% safe and I'm sure all the guys that have modified theirs can say the same.

I'm just asking Van to offer it as an option, not launch this through their Service Bulletin system.
__________________
Scott Schmidt
Salt Lake City, UT

RV-10 N104XP (1280 Hours)
RV-12 N321UT (Sold)
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-16-2010, 01:49 PM
Phil's Avatar
Phil Phil is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 1,658
Default

Understood, Scott.

I just had to get that off my chest because of all the complaining that's going on. We just seem to have lost sight of the target.

We've all been asking for Vans to address the doors. They know what's going on with the community via Matronics, VAF, and phone calls. They didn't dream this up and then decide to push it out.

We've all been begging for Vans to address the issue. You know that. Just this wasn't the elegant fix we had hoped for.

Phil
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-16-2010, 01:58 PM
ScottSchmidt's Avatar
ScottSchmidt ScottSchmidt is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post
Understood, Scott.

I just had to get that off my chest because of all the complaining that's going on. We just seem to have lost sight of the target.

We've all been asking for Vans to address the doors. They know what's going on with the community via Matronics, VAF, and phone calls. They didn't dream this up and then decide to push it out.

We've all been begging for Vans to address the issue. You know that. Just this wasn't the elegant fix we had hoped for.

Phil
I also understand. I should have spoken up during the ranting on Matronics when they discussed "bowing" doors but I didn't. I have been very busy at work the past 6 months and it is hard to keep up with all the discussions.

I just want to drive to root cause and make sure we don't jump to a solution that does not address the REAL problem.

What Sean has posted has the potential of being a great idea and great solution.
__________________
Scott Schmidt
Salt Lake City, UT

RV-10 N104XP (1280 Hours)
RV-12 N321UT (Sold)
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-16-2010, 02:02 PM
Phil's Avatar
Phil Phil is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 1,658
Default

I agree. I really like Sean's post....

It's by far the best suggestion I've seen so far.

Phil
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-16-2010, 02:04 PM
TSwezey TSwezey is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 1,849
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strasnuts View Post
Here is a couple of ideas for all the engineers out there that want to change the latch. After sitting in Scotts' airplane I came to the conclusion it wasn't needed but I personally think this is way better than the S.B. or B.S?

I know there are tons of versions of this idea it's just to keep everyone thinking of a better solution if it's going to be mandatory.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqOtd-lEQfU
We just had that same discussion about doing it the same way earlier today at our airport meeting.
__________________
Todd
N110TD
RV-10 Vesta V8 LS2/BMA EFIS/One formerly flying at 3J1 Hobbs stopped at 150 hours
Savannah, GA and Ridgeland, SC
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-16-2010, 04:48 PM
RV10inOz's Avatar
RV10inOz RV10inOz is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brisbane Qld. Aust.
Posts: 2,271
Default

The HEndricks system does not have a release button however it is a large over centre movemt, so to be fair its not an easy thing to accidently open......not at all, but all the other things people have done or fear could happen are possible as humans are involved!

Again I agree with Scott, it should not be a SB like the doubler plate, one is a structural modification, this one is a risk mitigation device and should be optional or suggesting this or a suitable alternative be fitted, as a prudent mitigator of risk.

By the way Scott.......I bet your RHS door sucks outwards too!
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-16-2010, 05:22 PM
ScottSchmidt's Avatar
ScottSchmidt ScottSchmidt is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV10inOz View Post

By the way Scott.......I bet your RHS door sucks outwards too!
As soon as the inversion clears here that is one thing I want to check. I thought I had checked that in the past but I really can't remember.

I read that most people are seeing about 1/4", is that correct?
__________________
Scott Schmidt
Salt Lake City, UT

RV-10 N104XP (1280 Hours)
RV-12 N321UT (Sold)
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 02:53 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.